Liberal Business owners - a true story of what I get to deal with right now

[Paulie]

Exactly. And if there were no gay regulation on the amount of teachers per student, and your ex busted her ass and was able to oversee more students, then her output increases based on her motivation.

But I know those regs were there so....blah.

That's a good point.

Hey Paulie...

Question...

In your service business....if you hired an additional employee who was as good as your best employee....how would the return on the first "best emnployee" increase due to the hiring of another good employee?

And a better question...

If the hiring of the second great employee resulted in NO increase in return of the first great emplyee....would you think something is wrong?

Now.....lets not divert by chiming in with unknown variables such as "the second great one will motivate the first hgreat one to be even better......

Just assume you are thrilled with the first one...you get 120% fromo him/her.....and you hired a second one who is equally as good.....exactly how would the return on the first one increase....and if it didnt, would you consider yourself as a failure of a business owner?

This wasn't what we were talking about as far as I can tell. You claimed that any new employee would always produce the same return as the last. My point is that a new employee can produce a BETTER return than a previous one...not that a previous one's return would increase.

Employees aren't robots, they're people, and they all bring their own thing to the table.

 

[Cecilie1200]

And if you want specifics, he said the fine would bankrupt them. The fine is only imposed after the first thirty employees. If he has 55 employees, the fine is $50k overall. $50k if the avg employee only makes $25k per year , for example, is only a $20 per paycheck reduction per employee to cover the fine. Bankrupt ? Thats why his story is bullshit, its pretty evident.

Let me show you how to do specifics, Punkin, since it's clearly not your strong suit.

SPECIFICALLY, the OP said this:

"Well," I said. "Right now our company has 47 employees. Expanding to a second locaton will put us over the 50 employee limit on Obamacare and we will have to pay health benefits for every one of our employees or pay the fine to avoid it. After looking at the books, that will bankrupt us." I explained.

Now, I don't know where YOU got the "55 employees" that you plugged in there; I can only assume that you pulled it out of your ass. It's pretty obvious from the quote above that ONE location requires almost 50 people. So a second location is NOT going to have 8 people running it (because 55 minus 47 is 8). It might not have as many as the first, but it will almost certainly be close.

So what you're talking about is doubling, or nearly doubling, your number of employees. Let's say they expand into the second location with 40 people, on top of the 47 they already have. That gives them 57 employees over the 30 that Obamcare "generously" doesn't fine you for. Would you like to tell the class how much the fine is going to be for that many people? Or how much their healthcare would cost, if Blue's employers decide to go that way?

If, in fact, I missed some point in my reading where the OP came back and said, "Oh, we're only talking about 8 more people" or something of that nature, then by all means, tell me.

 

[tooAlive]

And if you want specifics, he said the fine would bankrupt them. The fine is only imposed after the first thirty employees. If he has 55 employees, the fine is $50k overall. $50k if the avg employee only makes $25k per year , for example, is only a $20 per paycheck reduction per employee to cover the fine. Bankrupt ? Thats why his story is bullshit, its pretty evident.

Let me show you how to do specifics, Punkin, since it's clearly not your strong suit.

SPECIFICALLY, the OP said this:

"Well," I said. "Right now our company has 47 employees. Expanding to a second locaton will put us over the 50 employee limit on Obamacare and we will have to pay health benefits for every one of our employees or pay the fine to avoid it. After looking at the books, that will bankrupt us." I explained.

Now, I don't know where YOU got the "55 employees" that you plugged in there; I can only assume that you pulled it out of your ass. It's pretty obvious from the quote above that ONE location requires almost 50 people. So a second location is NOT going to have 8 people running it (because 55 minus 47 is 8). It might not have as many as the first, but it will almost certainly be close.

So what you're talking about is doubling, or nearly doubling, your number of employees. Let's say they expand into the second location with 40 people, on top of the 47 they already have. That gives them 57 employees over the 30 that Obamcare "generously" doesn't fine you for. Would you like to tell the class how much the fine is going to be for that many people? Or how much their healthcare would cost, if Blue's employers decide to go that way?

If, in fact, I missed some point in my reading where the OP came back and said, "Oh, we're only talking about 8 more people" or something of that nature, then by all means, tell me.

 

[gwennie]

Progressive ideas are great, as long as someone else is paying for them

That's right. The liberals don't give a rat **** what their agendas are.....as long as they don't have to pay for them.

 

[gwennie]

So I have to share this because it really pisses me off. So I manage a business for two owners who are absolutely fabulous people...I mean wonderful people and I love them to death...but they are flaming liberals and can't see their hand two inches past their nose. So prior to the election they tasked me with setting up a plan fo expansion into a second location. Now I know the books and so the other day we meet and ask my plan and my response was: "I don't think we can expand now"

"Why not?" they asked confused.

"Well," I said. "Right now our company has 47 employees. Expanding to a second locaton will put us over the 50 employee limit on Obamacare and we will have to pay health benefits for every one of our employees or pay the fine to avoid it. After looking at the books, that will bankrupt us." I explained.

"But our business is ready to take the next step." they said to me.

"Yes it is," I responded "but we can't afford to anymore. The good old days of expanding according to sales and demand are over." I explained. "That's not the way it works anymore."

"Well why not?" they asked sincerely.

"Well because of the Affordable Health Care Act" I said. I then explained all the implications and do you know what their response was? These flaming liberals who voted for Obama and pounded the "health care is a human right" angle? Know what they said to me? They said "Well we have to find a loophole to get out of this. We can't afford that. it will end our business."

I was tempted at that point to reach across the table and strangle them both screaming "this is what you voted for mother fuckers!!!!" but I kept my cool. I said slowly "the business landscape has changed. Now here are our options.....#1 cut every employee to below 30 hours a week. If they go over 30 hours we fire them on the spot."

"Well how will they support their families on only 30 hours a week?" they asked.

"If they go over 30 hours after the expansion," I explained "then you will support their families directly from your own pocket because the business cannot sustain the expense incurred by Obamacare." I got incredulous at this point. "Jesus ******* Christ have you not been paying attention?" I was met with silence.

"Now the other option is to expand to the new location but to sub-contract labor to a different entity. Technically, you will have no new employees and be under the 50 cap. On the other hand you have to entrust your labor to a totally different business...and don't even think about creating a dummy corporation yourself to hire those workers under unless you want a nice battle with the IRS for fraud. It will have to be a completely unrelated business with totally unrelated ownership."

So after a while of them thinking they looked at me and asked.

"So what you are saying is that we can't expand our business unless we slash the hours of our employees who need every hour they can get, sub-contract out our labor an allow an independent business to control our labor, or just say **** it and not expand at all?"

i said "Yep"

"THAT'S TOTAL BULLSHIT" they screamed

"That's what you voted for" I said calmly risking my job.

I didn't get fired. The expansion will not take place. 45 jobs set and ready just got lost thanks to Obamacare.

Anonymously bad mouthing your employers that trust you on a public forum - very classy.

This person has a right to their opinion and to express what's going on in his/her own workplace. Are you the thought/speech police????? Stop being an asshole.

 

[gwennie]

Some people tend to put the best interest of their country ahead of their personal wealth. Warren Buffet supported Obama. He'll find ways to build his businesses, and probably figure out ways to leverage the improved health of his workers.

If someone I paid to manage my business came to me and said we can't grow because we're moving toward universal health care, I'd think about hiring someone who told me how I can grow. I'd prefer hiring a systems thinker, who thought of the here and now, and gave me an optimal strategy. I wouldn't want some pea brain partisan hack telling me how I voted limited my growth potential. Too bad managers aren't required to take course work in operations research.

I've worked for, and managed groups for, companies who did quite a bit of work for federal, state, and city governments. When we grew to the point where small business set asides were at risk, we didn't whine about not growing. The task was to figure out how to grow. Maybe you're not cut out to be a manager.

That's because your head is stuck way up in the clouds somewhere instead of down here on planet Earth and dealing with the real world. In real life obamacare is going to kill small businesses.

 

[saveliberty]

And even if they didn't want to shift the $1310 per employee cost onto their employees, and it would "bankrupt them," does that mean that on average their employees don't net-profit them more than $1310 each, YEARLY? Wow, sounds they need a new Manager.

Oh yes, because that is the ONLY expense an employee represents huh? It costs me over two bucks to process your payroll check from start to finish each week. That is jsut a small cost. Imagine all the others you have no idea about. In your case, maybe you shouldn't, no need to invite a stroke.

 

[Avatar4321]

its not funny because you are too ******* stupid to get it.

Its not funny because we evolved, you had arrested development.

lol.....i guess you don't know how to make a woman quiver. Thats a good goal!

Real men don't have to brag about it. Insecure... that's another story.

 

[Greenbeard]

Page 32 of the thread seems a little late to make the obvious point that no one seems to have made. But I will anyway.

The point of the employer responsibility payments is not to force employers to offer coverage for the first time. Nationwide, the rate of firms with 50 or more employees that offer insurance coverage is 94-95%. Adding a de facto employer mandate may have that effect on the margins for the very small minority of firms that size that don't offer coverage--if you look at the two states that already have employer mandates, Hawaii and Massachusetts, their offer rates for firms that size are 99% and 98%, respectively--but that's not the point.

The point is to deter that 94-95% from dropping coverage. The point is to promote stability. People don't like change, particularly when it comes too rapidly. The employer responsibility payments are an attempt to maintain the status quo, at least for now. They're to keep employers from dumping into the exchanges.

People will get used to the idea of shopping for their own coverage 1) once it becomes the clear that the protections and perks of the group markets will now be available in the individual market, and 2) if the small business exchanges are used well by states. But that's not going to happen overnight. Hence the anti-dumping provision in the form of the employer shared responsibility payment.

 

[saveliberty]

Since the government is going to offer some safety net plan and all the adminstrative costs are removed from the company, certain employers WILL dump. All you have to do is llok at all the big companies that ran for waivers already. Good attempt at deflection though.

 

[Greenbeard]

All you have to do is llok at all the big companies that ran for waivers already.

There isn't a single company (with more than 50 employees) in the known universe that has a waiver from the employer shared responsibility payments. Nor will there ever be, unless Congress changes the law.

 

[Avatar4321]

Read the OP, its part of his job. I charge after the first stupid question.

unless the OP has a degree in Business Admin and or a similar degree, he or she should STFU and do that upper management asks.

This is the problem with the left. They assume that unless you go to a school and get a peice of paper, you don't know anything. They haven't broken free of this false paradign and realize you can learn so much without ever getting a degree simply through study, experience, and experiments.

 

[Avatar4321]

Yeah, but if they were actually in business and dealt with these issues, they would be less likely to be progressives and more likely to be conservative or libertarian.

Or they would be like Blue's employers, and hire a conservative to run their business and patiently explain to them how they just voted to **** themselves in the ass with sandy lube.

"Oh, you wanted to self-righteously vote for 'those greedy bastard business owners' to pay more money, and forgot that YOU are a 'greedy bastard business owner'? Congratulations, and bend over and grab your ankles, 'cause here comes Obama."

It's fascinating that both you and Avatar pretend that the OP hasn't been exposed as lying to his clients. If they actually exist.

It's fascinating that you think merely throwing insults around means you've proven anything.

 

[Lakhota]

So I have to share this because it really pisses me off. So I manage a business for two owners who are absolutely fabulous people...I mean wonderful people and I love them to death...but they are flaming liberals and can't see their hand two inches past their nose. So prior to the election they tasked me with setting up a plan fo expansion into a second location. Now I know the books and so the other day we meet and ask my plan and my response was: "I don't think we can expand now"

"Why not?" they asked confused.

"Well," I said. "Right now our company has 47 employees. Expanding to a second locaton will put us over the 50 employee limit on Obamacare and we will have to pay health benefits for every one of our employees or pay the fine to avoid it. After looking at the books, that will bankrupt us." I explained.

"But our business is ready to take the next step." they said to me.

"Yes it is," I responded "but we can't afford to anymore. The good old days of expanding according to sales and demand are over." I explained. "That's not the way it works anymore."

"Well why not?" they asked sincerely.

"Well because of the Affordable Health Care Act" I said. I then explained all the implications and do you know what their response was? These flaming liberals who voted for Obama and pounded the "health care is a human right" angle? Know what they said to me? They said "Well we have to find a loophole to get out of this. We can't afford that. it will end our business."

I was tempted at that point to reach across the table and strangle them both screaming "this is what you voted for mother fuckers!!!!" but I kept my cool. I said slowly "the business landscape has changed. Now here are our options.....#1 cut every employee to below 30 hours a week. If they go over 30 hours we fire them on the spot."

"Well how will they support their families on only 30 hours a week?" they asked.

"If they go over 30 hours after the expansion," I explained "then you will support their families directly from your own pocket because the business cannot sustain the expense incurred by Obamacare." I got incredulous at this point. "Jesus ******* Christ have you not been paying attention?" I was met with silence.

"Now the other option is to expand to the new location but to sub-contract labor to a different entity. Technically, you will have no new employees and be under the 50 cap. On the other hand you have to entrust your labor to a totally different business...and don't even think about creating a dummy corporation yourself to hire those workers under unless you want a nice battle with the IRS for fraud. It will have to be a completely unrelated business with totally unrelated ownership."

So after a while of them thinking they looked at me and asked.

"So what you are saying is that we can't expand our business unless we slash the hours of our employees who need every hour they can get, sub-contract out our labor an allow an independent business to control our labor, or just say **** it and not expand at all?"

i said "Yep"

"THAT'S TOTAL BULLSHIT" they screamed

"That's what you voted for" I said calmly risking my job.

I didn't get fired. The expansion will not take place. 45 jobs set and ready just got lost thanks to Obamacare.

Pure NaziCon bullshit.

 

[saveliberty]

All you have to do is llok at all the big companies that ran for waivers already.

There isn't a single company (with more than 50 employees) in the known universe that has a waiver from the employer shared responsibility payments. Nor will there ever be, unless Congress changes the law.

The Department of Health and Human Services, headed by Kathleen Sebelius has tallied the total number of ObamaCare waivers issued since the Barack Obama signed the government takeover of healthcare into law nearly two years ago.

Roughly 1,200 companies received waivers from part of the healthcare reform law, the Health and Human Services Department said Friday.

Friday marks the last time HHS will have to update the total number of waivers, putting to rest a recurring political firestorm. The department had been updating its waiver totals every month, prompting monthly attacks from the GOP.

If ObamaCare is so great, why was there a need for waivers at all?

All told, 1,231 companies applied for and received waivers from the law’s restrictions on annual benefit caps. The law requires plans to gradually raise their benefit limits, and all annual limits will become illegal in 2014. Companies that received waivers can keep their caps intact until 2014.


Final ObamaCare Waiver Count? 1,231 - Katie Pavlich

Its reduced coverage limits and you deliberately play dumb hack.

 

[Avatar4321]

well, im not drunk, far from it. You are one of those know it all I guess.


The OP is clearly not qualified. My first assessment is the OP is using politics to form a business decisions. Secondly, the OP just does not make sense as the facts cited are not true. Sounds like the owners are getting advice from a uneducated hack.

Its is there business so they are entitled to do as they please. I bet good money they will seek a second opinion that is not politically motivated.

Are you seriously going to argue that politics doesn't influence business decisions at all? Seriously?

 

[saveliberty]

At least these losers can say they were consistent. All of them resorted to discrediting the poster and no one disproved the issue.