We're Lowering Your Wages

[RodISHI]

Until you figure that out, you will NEVER succeed in any business endeavor.

So just exactly how many times does one have to succeed in business to become a success in someone such as yourself's eyes?

 

[Bern80]

What are you advocating? Are you some kind of superior being or race, Superman maybe?

The gist of your post claim that anyone who advocates in favor of a living wage is, "Breeding", "superior," "weaker" employees by allowing starvation and slave policies.

Since these are getting long and you quite clearly are getting frazzled as evidenced by your responses become less and less constructive and more and more obtuse to what I am saying we'll go back to square.

You claim I can't see past the nost on my face, so let's do a little exercise. You claim my company should not be in business if it doesn't provide a standard of living wage. Do you honestly think I would be oppossed to a sytem that could actually function that way? Of course not. As with many liberal ideals yeah it looks great on paper, but in practice and FACT (as in not opinion) it will doom the entire society. That is why I have a problem with your proposal. Not because I want people to be poor, but because I have the ability to see the obvious logistical problems in a society that works that way. It isn't a question of just paying everybody more so they can live, it is a question of what are the consequences for EVERYBODY of doing that?

You seem to be of the belief that my company is doing something wrong because things are harder now than they were before. That simply isn't the case. Again we sell what can best be described as a none neccessity. When economies cycle down people spend less money on the things they don't need. Thus there are fewer orders for our products. Subsequently profits are down. Then it's simply a math problem. Last year we could afford to employ more employees than we do now because there was high demand for our product, so we had a higher demand for labor. Now there is less demand for our product so now there is a lesser demand for labor. Be honest you don't just want companies to pay a living wage, you would have them gaurantee people jobs for life regardless of ecoomic conditions.

Back to dollars and sense: Your mandate is now in place: all companies including ours must pay x wage which may be x amount more than it had before for money companies especially those that hire people with low skill sets. What happens when expenses exceed revenue? Either you figure how to get more revenue (tough when there is little demand for your product) or you downsize. If costs continue to exceed revenue than you probably won't be able to keep business doors open. So what started out as altruistc bleeding heart sentiment to do good by everyone ended up costing everyone their jobs. What started out as trying to put more money in people's pockets has ended up not only putting less money in people's pockets but actually causing higher unemployment.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Since these are getting long and you quite clearly are getting frazzled as evidenced by your responses become less and less constructive and more and more obtuse to what I am saying we'll go back to square.

You claim I can't see past the nost on my face, so let's do a little exercise. You claim my company should not be in business if it doesn't provide a standard of living wage. Do you honestly think I would be oppossed to a ssytem that could actually function that way? Of course not. As with many liveral ideals yeah it looks great in paper, but in practice and FACT (as in not opinion) it will doom the entire society. That is why I have a problem with your proposal. Not because I want people to be poor, but because I have the ability to see the obvious logistical problems in a society that works that way. It isn't a question of just paying everybody more so they can live, it is a question of what are the consequences for EVERYBODY of doing that?

You seem to be of the belief that my company is doing something wrong because things are harder now than they were before. That simply isn't the case. Again we sell what can best be described as a none neccessity. When economies cycle down people spend less money on the things they don't need. Thus there are fewer orders for our products. Subsequently profits are down. Then it's simply a math problem. Last year we could afford to more employees than we do now because there was high demand for our product, so we had a higher demand for labor. Now there is less demand for our product so now there is a lesser demand for labor. Be honest you don't just want companies to pay a living wage, you would have them gaurantee people jobs for life regardless of ecoomic conditions.

Back to dollars and sense: Your mandate is now in place: all companies including ours must pay x wage which x amount more than it had before. What happens when expenses exceed revenue? Either you figure how to get more revenue (tough when there is little demand for your product) or you downsize. If costs continue to exceed revenue than you probably won't be able to keep business doors open. So what started out as altruistc bleeding heart sentiment to do good by everyone ended up costing everyone their jobs. THAT is the reality of your proposal.

Another great post.

 

[Bern80]

I've been hearing about this forum for several hours now. I am the husband of the gal who will never succeed in any business endeavor as you say. You have alot to learn lad and it's not up to my wife or I to teach you. What is happening now in this country today is the result of a president being duped by two bankers. It haunted this president until the day he died. He said and I quote, "Had I known what they were doing I would never have signed it." This particular president had signed a bill into law that has devastated this country. You go search it out and find out who it was and what the man signed. Being a member of a top notch fortune 500 company you should be able to easily figure out who, what and where. Cheers lad. Rod

Obviously you two are perfect for each other. It's always nice to have someone there to positively reinforce your opioinons. Asanine as they may be. This isn't a debate about this policy or that policy. It is a debate about ideologies and the role of business in society.

Your wife asked me last 'what am I advocating'? Simple. I'm advocating against her position that essentially it the responsiblity of someone other than yourself to provide for yourself. It is YOUR responsibility to provide for youself. Putting that burden on anyone else will ultimately, and historically has been shown to be detrimental to societies.

The strenght of a society is based on the ingenuity and intelligence of it's people. Your wife's position would effectively dumb down society because it feeds of negative aspects of human nature. People dont' challenge themselves if they don't have to. When people don't challenge themselves and meet goals they do not grow as human beings. Her proposals teach that x level of effort is required for your life to basically be okay. Which is a level of effort less than what is currently required. Why do you think countries like France hae ridiculous unemployment rates? Because they tax the hell out their citizenry to provide some the most ridiculous unemployment benefits the world has seen. So given human nature one is going to put forth less effort, because less is required to achieve the same outcome.

Your wife claimed I can't see past the nose on my face. It is exactly the opposite. The reason I don't share your and her opinion is that I CAN fairly accurately predict the logistics involved and what the consequences will be. The FACT is they will most likely be negative rather than positive.

 

[RodISHI]

Bern,
You have not heard a proposal from me. You have only assumed based on your predisposition to accuse me of trying to bilk your poor little luxury item company by asking that everyone recieve at least enough when they work to pay their avergae daily bills.

 

[Skull Pilot]

Bern,
You have not heard a proposal from me. You have only assumed based on your predisposition to accuse me of trying to bilk your poor little luxury item company by asking that everyone recieve at least enough when they work to pay their avergae daily bills.

And who will decide what our "average daily bills" should be?

The guy who spends 20 dollars a day on mocha assochinos and cigarettes average daily bills are not the same as the guy who takes his coffee to work in a thermos and brown bags lunch everyday.

So what we need is a government certified "average daily bill" guide.

Let's see.

Breakfast

1 cup oatmeal per day per person.......
2 cups coffee per day per adult (coffee is bad for minors).....
1 cup juice per person per day


Lunch

2 slices bologna per person per day
2 slices bread per person per day
1 table spoon mustard or mayo but not both per person per day
1 apple per person per day
As much tap water as you want.

need I go on?

 

[RodISHI]

And who will decide what our "average daily bills" should be?

The guy who spends 20 dollars a day on mocha assochinos and cigarettes average daily bills are not the same as the guy who takes his coffee to work in a thermos and brown bags lunch everyday.

So what we need is a government certified "average daily bill" guide.

Let's see.

Breakfast

1 cup oatmeal per day per person.......
2 cups coffee per day per adult (coffee is bad for minors).....
1 cup juice per person per day


Lunch

2 slices bologna per person per day
2 slices bread per person per day
1 table spoon mustard or mayo but not both per person per day
1 apple per person per day
As much tap water as you want.

need I go on?

You did not know that we already have agency that do this?

 

[Skull Pilot]

You did not know that we already have agency that do this?

No and I don't want to know. I think what I spend my money on....let me clarify...


I think that where and on what i spend what little money the government allows me to keep is my business

 

[RodISHI]

No and I don't want to know. I think what I spend my money on....let me clarify...


I think that where and on what i spend what little money the government allows me to keep is my business

Do you work for somene else, retired, welfare or own some sort of business?

 

[Skull Pilot]

if you must know, my wife and i own a business

 

[RodISHI]

if you must know, my wife and i own a business

Do you have employees?

 

[Skull Pilot]

10

 

[RodISHI]

So that means you have at least ten major write offs every tax season.

Do you have full time or part time employees or both?

 

[Skull Pilot]

Please.

Payroll is the single biggest expense in my budget as it is with most small businesses.
Payroll taxes, unemployment taxes, state taxes, federal taxes, workers comp etc etc etc

It certainly seems to me that all those so called write offs cost a hell of a lot of money.

 

[RodISHI]

Please.

Payroll is the single biggest expense in my budget as it is with most small businesses.
Payroll taxes, unemployment taxes, state taxes, federal taxes, workers comp etc etc etc

It certainly seems to me that all those so called write offs cost a hell of a lot of money.

Obviously by what you say you have ten employees on your payroll. So that means you also have ten writeoffs that are providing something valuble into the scheme of your business or you would not be in a business with an employee based workforce.

It is not that all businesses spend more on their employees than all other expenses that they have in order to operate. Unless your business is selling thin air or just merely selling other peoples labor.

There is a vast variety of small and large business enterprises.

Does your business have a high employee turn-over rate?

Do you pay your employees at least the minimum federal wage or do you slice their paychecks up in some sort of commission based pay?

 

[Skull Pilot]

just get to the point

 

[RodISHI]

One point has already been made. You have a business that you pay employees to provide you with labor of some kind (Although you have not stated which kind).

You are obviously in business making a profit from other peoples labor.

You don't want the government telling you what to do with the profits you made from this employee based enterprise that you and evidently your wife operate and recieve some kind of profit from.

 

[Skull Pilot]

and your point is?

 

[RodISHI]

You are just another whining voice out there in the comos claiming you are making a profit from anothers labor and whining about how the government screws you and takes too much of your money already.

Obviously you are lying or unwilling to lay it out on the table to show why as a small business you would be screwed by insuring that any employee makes a living wage.

 

[Bern80]

Bern,
You have not heard a proposal from me. You have only assumed based on your predisposition to accuse me of trying to bilk your poor little luxury item company by asking that everyone recieve at least enough when they work to pay their avergae daily bills.

You most certainly did. You proposseed all business pay peolpe a living wage. Stop being lazy and respond the posts. I have explained why several times now why that will lead to greater unemployment. If you can refute that in anyway do so. I assumed nothing of you.