Entrepreneurs and buinessfolk

you forgot E) there might be a market demand, but i'm holding out for a sweeter deal. if people feel the pain enough, i'll get my way

My thoughts exactly, until your business is doing more than you current employees can do, you hire no one. There has to be a bigger demand for your product than you can deliver. I am not sure where the breaking point for demand of product rests, maybe 20% more before you hire an employee. This has the benefit of making your product scarce, thus driving up its price,...more profit,...and eases in those extra employees either part or full time as needed.

One of Sears old tricks was to find an entrepreneur making a good sale-able product, and sign them into a contract to deliver as many widgets as there demand might need, and to be delivered in a short period of 30 days or so. Then they would market the product in their stores, and when the guy could not meet the quota of products they would sue for non performance and take his business. So watch what you sign and think ahead of the possibility of a large demand for your product.
 
Last edited:
Do you make a product, sell a service, or hire more employees based on:

A- why the fuck not? I've got money to waste

B- because hiring people will get me into heaven and

D) hiring people to serve no one and make me no money is my hobby (I love wealth redistribution and giving to charity is too simple and straightforward)

D- because there exists market demand and I can make money- or at least it looks like there's money to be made

?

E) JBeukema doesn't know shit about what he's talking about.


O rly? Do tell us what motivates entrepreneurship, hiring, and the expansion of business or introduction of new products and services.

People enter into business to make money. PERIOD.

And there is nothing wrong with this.
 
D of course, but the rub is in that in a consumer import based economy..
Well people are pretty much buying all they can now ie market saturation.
The only way to increase demand is to either create more jobs or pay the existing workers more money. But without increased demand neither is viable....
And business that depend on excess consumer spending are folding as people cut back on spending, further worsening the situation.

Quite a hole we have worked ourselves into.

This holiday season will tell us all we need to know about how bad the times really are, so lets wait on the January numbers.:eusa_angel:
 
and try keeping up with demand of union wages...

union wages? Except for govt paid employees unions are a single digit percentage of the workforce. And govt employees have no competition.

Yet another right wing mythical talking point.

And besides i htink i covered that in my post. Our wages and lifestyles will be continuing to drop for quite a few years.

sure. That's why every time the gubmint increases the minimum wage...union wages go up?

:eusa_hand:

lmao!!!
 
Well in this economy and this administration good luck as you will face these issues.

1) You will not know your health care cost when you try to hire people due to the new Health Care bill.
2) You will not know your tax liability in relation to the hiring of someone.
3) You will not know your energy cost due to the unknown effect of Cap and Tax......
4) Where will you get your employees from.A good number of people now will turn down a job offer because it's on the books and they are getting comfortable getting paid for not working.

Good luck folks.
 
you forgot E) there might be a market demand, but i'm holding out for a sweeter deal. if people feel the pain enough, i'll get my way

I kind of think that is what is happening now (past 3 years). Unions have been broken and the government has almost no leverage (That it wants to use anyhow) against private firms.

They are pretty much calling the shots.

Step A - Put in elected officials that will do your bidding.
Step B - Break the Unions.
Step C - Privatize profit and socialize risk.
Step D - Get rid of all regulations.
Step E - Bring back the monopoly.

We are between C and D now.

I'm all for D.

yes... we need more flaming rivers....
 
Not what I said...nor did I allude to it. For you see? That is a given.

a given since judicial activism set them free from the restraint of their charters :p

"The idea that institutions, established for the use of the nation, cannot be touched nor modified, even to make them answer their end, because of the rights gratuitously supposed in those employed to manage them in trust for the public, may, perhaps be a salutary provision against the abuses of a monarch, but it is most absurd against the nation itself" -- Thomas Jefferson; letter to William Plumer (1819)

And I would agree to that. I am all for Responsibilty...and forsight to see the effects of an action beyond the act of setting forth an action and dealing with the reprecussions as it would affect others.

Some call it three demensional thinking. To the Statists? They call it a pain in the ass. For it would also portend the act of being responsible.

Such a fool. IF anyone doesn't work by foresight, it is the cons who drove us into this black hole. It is Bush asking Powell instead of the treasury if we can fight 2 wars back to back.
 
Last edited:
O rly? Do tell us what motivates entrepreneurship, hiring, and the expansion of business or introduction of new products and services.

People enter into business to make money. PERIOD.

And there is nothing wrong with this.
So then D- as I said repeatedly

You agree then that the jew is wrong

I don't know what he agrees.
I agree you are a simp and a half.

Sometimes there is a perception of a market need. Sometimes there is belief that a market could be created. How much demand was there for a Kindle before anyone actually developed and marketed one?
 
E) JBeukema doesn't know shit about what he's talking about.


O rly? Do tell us what motivates entrepreneurship, hiring, and the expansion of business or introduction of new products and services.

People enter into business to make money. PERIOD.

And there is nothing wrong with this.

Ahh sigh. I wish that were true, but there are other reasons to start a business besides making money. Like for a business write off. SF lawyers buy up almond orchards in the central valley and let the trees die. They then write them off. Then there are people who have businesses to give themselves something to do. It allows them to interact with others, and fulfills their social needs. Some people have businesses for recognition, such as artists. An old guitar picker once told me, it is better to have someone steal your songs than sell them, because then you know you are good. And it is better to give them away to those who do make money, because your song carry's your name on it.

Anyway, just saying, not everyone is interested in making money. Life is to be enjoyed like a fine wine. Take the golden ring when it is there. I am reminded of the guy cutting into and out of traffic who finally gets stopped at the light. And pulling up next to him slowly is the first car he cut off way back there several blocks. Don't rush life or the golden ring, it will eventually come to you. I offered someone here, think the rabbi, an invention that is guaranteed to make him a million. He isn't ready for the golden ring.
 
Last edited:
union wages? Except for govt paid employees unions are a single digit percentage of the workforce. And govt employees have no competition.

Yet another right wing mythical talking point.

And besides i htink i covered that in my post. Our wages and lifestyles will be continuing to drop for quite a few years.

sure. That's why every time the gubmint increases the minimum wage...union wages go up?

:eusa_hand:

lmao!!!

It's true. For the most part union scale is indexed to the minimum wage.
 
O rly? Do tell us what motivates entrepreneurship, hiring, and the expansion of business or introduction of new products and services.

People enter into business to make money. PERIOD.

And there is nothing wrong with this.

Ahh sigh. I wish that were true, but there are other reasons to start a business besides making money. Like for a business write off. SF lawyers buy up almond orchards in the central valley and let the trees die. They then write them off. Then there are people who have businesses to give themselves something to do. It allows them to interact with others, and fulfills their social needs. Some people have businesses for recognition, such as artists. An old guitar picker once told me, it is better to have someone steal your songs than sell them, because then you know you are good. And it is better to give them away to those who do make money, because your song carry's your name on it.

Anyway, just saying, not everyone is interested in making money. Life is to be enjoyed like a fine wine. Take the golden ring when it is there. I am reminded of the guy cutting into and out of traffic who finally gets stopped at the light. And pulling up next to him slowly is the first he cut off way back there several blocks. Don't rush life or the golden ring, it will eventually come to you. I offered someone here, think the rabbi, an invention that is guaranteed to make him a million. He isn't ready for the golden ring.
Ahh boy..
What the poster is trying to state is the primary function of any business is to turn a profit for it's owners and investors.
Now, I googled your claim about these lawyers that as you claim, buy up almond orchards and allow the tress to die.....Could not find anything that supports your claim as true.
In fact I did a search and used your phrase verbatim to find any evidence of this and here is the link for the responses. NONE of these supports your claim of the almond orchard killing lawyers...lawyers buy almond orchards and allow trees to die - Yahoo! Search Results
Care to explain yourself?
 
a given since judicial activism set them free from the restraint of their charters :p

"The idea that institutions, established for the use of the nation, cannot be touched nor modified, even to make them answer their end, because of the rights gratuitously supposed in those employed to manage them in trust for the public, may, perhaps be a salutary provision against the abuses of a monarch, but it is most absurd against the nation itself" -- Thomas Jefferson; letter to William Plumer (1819)

And I would agree to that. I am all for Responsibilty...and forsight to see the effects of an action beyond the act of setting forth an action and dealing with the reprecussions as it would affect others.

Some call it three demensional thinking. To the Statists? They call it a pain in the ass. For it would also portend the act of being responsible.

Such a fool. IF anyone doesn't work by foresight, it is the cons who drove us into this black hole. It is Bush asking Powell instead of the treasury if we can fight 2 wars back to back.

Do you babble on this well in REAL LIFE>?
 
sure. That's why every time the gubmint increases the minimum wage...union wages go up?

:eusa_hand:

lmao!!!

It's true. For the most part union scale is indexed to the minimum wage.

It is probably the other way around, as Union contracts are negotiated at certain intervals that are not the same. Some 1 year, 2,3,4,5, year contracts, long before minimum wage is a thought. Depending on the Union, contracts are not the same hourly rates, same benefits, or same years. I really don't think they are tied together, anymore than CEO raises, sports figures, actors, singers, truck drivers, etc.

For instance, when we have given these massive bailouts of millions, billions, trillions, did the minimum wage go up??:eusa_angel: How about when they jack the economy up and down with interest rates, GM throwing profits into stocks instead of the economy. All these things have an affect. Military pay go up, did the minimum wage increase?

The minimum wage should be a percentage of the GDP, going up or down each year. Same thing for representatives. If they don't make GDP go up, they take a cut in pay like everybody else.
 
Last edited:
And I would agree to that. I am all for Responsibilty...and forsight to see the effects of an action beyond the act of setting forth an action and dealing with the reprecussions as it would affect others.

Some call it three demensional thinking. To the Statists? They call it a pain in the ass. For it would also portend the act of being responsible.

Such a fool. IF anyone doesn't work by foresight, it is the cons who drove us into this black hole. It is Bush asking Powell instead of the treasury if we can fight 2 wars back to back.

Do you babble on this well in REAL LIFE>?

Only when you are playing with mah cock pedo. So stick that in your ear.:lol:
 
The Great American Postwar manufacturing base (which evolved over 35 years of New Deal Liberalism) was responsible for creating the globe's highest paid working class in history.

The goal of the liberals was to prevent the market from doing what markets do: lowering labor costs to the point of creating a subsistence class of impoverished workers.

The goal of the liberals was to give workers something they lacked in 3rd world dictatorships: a New Deal.

The goal of the postwar liberal era was to give workers a larger slice of pie, that is, the goal of FDR was to turn American workers into a thriving middle class. This is why he used government to ensure higher wages and a low cost of living and retirement security (aka Social Security benefits) and easier access to college and affordable health care and affordable housing and a whole regulatory apparatus that ensured business could not set up monopolies over necessary consumer staples (like medicine and energy).

What happened once a thriving, financially secure middle class was created?

DEMAND! DEMAND! DEMAND!

The middle class could afford to spend, and because of this America had the largest consumption economy in history.

Facing such high middle class demand, what did capital do? It added jobs. And what happened when it added jobs? There was even more demand . . . so capital was forced to add even more jobs.

It's called trickle up wealth, i.e., wealth that is created when the government focuses on demand (the middle class) rather than the suppliers (the hedge fund class). During the postwar years, the USA put money in the hands of its workers; during the post-Reagan years, the USA gave its support to capital through subsidies, bailouts, tax breaks, and deregulation. [And guess what: we've been losing good jobs ever since]

The 50s and 60s were a period of America's greatest economic growth -- because the government ensured that we had solvent consumers who could afford to buy what they were producing (unlike the 3rd world which is built around slave labor).

Here's a dirty secret of the postwar years. Business was sick of catering to the middle class. They wanted cheaper labor. They wanted Asian sweat shops (and they would get it: see the relationship between Walmart and China, or Nike and Taiwan. Starting in the late 70s America started to ship it's high-wage-&-benefit manufacturing jobs to china. The jobs that would return would place the middle class in a sea of no-benefit, no-futer retail temp jobs).

What happened when Reagan busted the unions and sold America on the magic of cheap labor? The profits of the CEOs and share holders exploded. (BUT the middle class, now making alot less money, fizzled.) That is, wealth would now accumulate narrowly in bank accounts of the wealthy, to be handed out to politicians or stuffed into dynastic inheritances. Tragically, the American consumer no longer had the money to consume.

So what did we do? Starting in the 80s America fueled it's massive consumption economy with debt. Indeed, to maintain the historically singular middle class, to keep from losing the very thing which separated us from Russia and the 3rd world, we started handing out credit cards. Starting with election of Reagan, the middle class went on a 30 year credit binge. [We had to do something to cover up the fact that money wasn't truckling down to consumers]

Essentially, starting with Reagan, the middle class started to assume unhealthy levels of debt, just to hang on to their ever diminishing standard of living. The rich got richer, while the poor lost solid jobs/benefits and had to turn to credit cards.

What happens when you over rely on fancy debt instruments for too long?

You break the bank.

When Reagan decided to shift government's focus from the demand side (middle class) to the supply side (the owners of capital); when he decided to give capital cheap labor, he set the middle class on a path of destruction. We are now living in that bed.

Demand is gone. There is no reason to add jobs.

America got punk'd in 1980. The rest you may ignore. The damage is done.
 
Last edited:
Such a fool. IF anyone doesn't work by foresight, it is the cons who drove us into this black hole. It is Bush asking Powell instead of the treasury if we can fight 2 wars back to back.

Do you babble on this well in REAL LIFE>?

Only when you are playing with mah cock pedo. So stick that in your ear.:lol:
:eusa_eh:

American Trolling League
Rejected


We regret to inform you that your submission has been rejected. Your trolling is simply not up to ATL standards. USMB requires all trolls to be registered with the ATL and to have current ATL certification to ensure quality. In accordance with the Terms of Use and applicable rules, regulations, and standards, you are ordered to CEASE AND DESIST your activities until you are able to meet ATL standards and acquire certification.

Sincerely

James Beukema
Master Poe, American Trolling League


PS: I recommend checking out the Romper Room, so as not to ruin perfectly good threads elsewhere in USMB.
 

Forum List

Back
Top