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

[Paulie]

Thats good to hear.

around here, we had a few small guys go out of business because they cant afford to price match.

At p.f, you can pay $20 and it includes tanning and also a permanent guest pass.

That's definitely a tempting price, but I prefer the local gym I go to because it's not crowded...which I would expect with the cheap corporate gyms.

They are crowded, and I dont like them.

When I do my cribs episode of my house, you'll see how dope my gym is. Maybe instead of waiting for the rest of my renos, I should do an episode of just my gym..........hmm.

The gym I go to is $40 if you take advantage of the periodic specials they offer. They use the Keiser pneumatic machines and have a station for isolating every muscle group. I'm not a fan of some of them bc I don't think they truly isolate the muscle they're supposed to, but I supplement those with the free weights. And included in that price is access to any of the personal training programs offered, which is a lot. It's mostly a gym geared towards women...lots of hot moms...can't beat that!

 

[Jarhead]

here is the best way to explain it..in simple terms...

A servcice company does not have revenue per employee increase with addtional employees.....revenue per employee is a stationary number....such is different in manufacturing....but in service, all analyses are made based on the return per employee being a set number...regardless of the increase in staff....

This does not include cost of space and technology.

If expanding means the cost of employee will increase, but the return on employee will remain the same, then one would not expand.

Now...if going above 50 employees means the cost of each employee will increase, but the return will remain the same, then an analysis will be needed to determine where it would make sense to expand....and as the numbers above show...expanding by 33% is far from the number...

And unfortunately...expanding by anything more than 33% is next to impossible at one shot.

Take it from there.

You're automatically, and wrongly, assuming that every company will maintain wages at the same price and simply add healthcare as a fully additional benefit.

IOW, you're paying your employee 25,000 a year and no healthcare, but now healthcare is mandated and you pay your employee 25,000 a year plus 5,000 in healthcare, for a 30,000 package.

Maybe the employer cuts wages to 20,000 a year, plus 5,000 in healthcare.

For no substantial net loss.

If a successful company were to do that, it would lose the employees tha tmade it successful.

Contrary to what the left wants to say....employers know where their bread is buttered.

 

[g5000]

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.

This story is a complete fabrication. Are you proud of being a liar?

I have not read all 11 pages of this topic, but has anyone pointed out the huge flaming mistake in this post?

If this story were true, which it isn't, the two bosses would have fired your ass for the bogus information you gave them.

Does anyone else see the bullshit information, or am I the only one?



.

 

[Ravi]

you are a fool.
The other accouintant may be hired due to an increase in frim reputation and the need for another 50 hours of manpower...
Pay attention.

No offense, but you live in lala land. You don't hire people unless you expect to make a profit off of their labor.

you are either not paying attention, unable to read, or just a freaking fool.

I never said anyone would ever hire someone to not make a profit.

You are just too wrapped up in finding fault in those that think differently than you to actually unbderstand what is being said.

No, you said they might hire someone because their reputation increased.

Again, you don't hire someone unless you expect to make a profit off their labor.

 

[Jarhead]

And your original statement said return per employee is stagnant and doesnt increase in the service industry, which is why Paulie and I took issue.

No...I said it was stagnant and doesnt increase due to expansion. Just becuase you increease your employees, doesnt mean your return per employee increases....your profit will increase......but your return per employee will not..

And it came from my explanation that if, in the service industry, your COST per employee increases (ACA), and your profit per employee doesnt increase, then you need to find where it makes sense to increase youir staff...

You need to pay attention.

You were speaking in too many absolutes.

And to say that profit per employee doesnt increase with hiring, as an ABSOLUTE, is wrong anyways.

Vetting can tighten, the hiree may be a Consultant, etc.

There's so many factors involved and so many unique situations that to make an absolute statement like you did, even after clarification, is wrong.

GT....I cited an example....and you debated my example.

Look...I am finding that you are just another asshole that wants to bhe right. I pity you.

FYI....I did quite well in the largest markert in the country..I was good at wehat I did and was paid well for it.

You, on the other hand is some bullshit artist who claims to be employed, but for some reason able to be on here all day....so you can take your "i know more than you do attitude" and use it on someone else.

BTW...hows that recovery going? Huh? You know...the one you and all of your firends were saying for 3 years was "just around the corner"..

.and how is that healthcare going for you...up what....20%? You know...the one that was going to decrease healthcare costs for all of us?

How is that arab spring going? You know...the one you all said was a result of Obama and his "hand out for peace" attitude

LOL...continue to be right....go ahead....enjoy it while you can.

In the meantime, I am enjoying my free time reading posts by dreamers like you who demonstrate that they are uneducated assholes with little at stake but their freebies..

Cya GT......on my ignore list.

 

[Jarhead]

No offense, but you live in lala land. You don't hire people unless you expect to make a profit off of their labor.

you are either not paying attention, unable to read, or just a freaking fool.

I never said anyone would ever hire someone to not make a profit.

You are just too wrapped up in finding fault in those that think differently than you to actually unbderstand what is being said.

No, you said they might hire someone because their reputation increased.

Again, you don't hire someone unless you expect to make a profit off their labor.

Of course....you read only one post.

Read the thread and see where it went.

Or is that asking too much of you.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Hey, if 1.5% changes are no big deal when it comes to business raising prices, why don't we cut government spending by the same 1.5% annually for the next 10 years?

 

[Paulie]

Here's an example of where jarhead is correct..

I opened a preschool with my son's mom a couple years ago. When she hires a new employee it's a static return because she's still charging the same per child regardless how motivated the employee is.

But that's just an example of why there's variables in this. I can hire a new employee and if he busts his ass and we get a project done quicker, my return increases.

It all depends on the business.

 

[g5000]

So I take it no one knows what the big flaming mistake in the OP is. This whole topic is premised on a giant lie.



.

 

[Ravi]

you are either not paying attention, unable to read, or just a freaking fool.

I never said anyone would ever hire someone to not make a profit.

You are just too wrapped up in finding fault in those that think differently than you to actually unbderstand what is being said.

No, you said they might hire someone because their reputation increased.

Again, you don't hire someone unless you expect to make a profit off their labor.

Of course....you read only one post.

Read the thread and see where it went.

Or is that asking too much of you.

I followed the thread. You've made no sense.

 

[saveliberty]

^meltdown.

Everything you just said is an exact reflection of yourself. Period.

Actually, its a reflection of listening to a jackass with no facts of his own spouting knowledge in a field he has none. Where's your fact on all small businesses eligible for handouts support?

 

[Claudette]

I've figured out Obama's Jobs Program: create more part time jobs as employers reduce full time employment below the 30 hour threshold.

The moonbats are getting the logical result of their voting choices; even colleges are cutting instructor hours to skirt the ObamaCare requirement.

As part of what is known as Obamacare, the Affordable Care Act, which takes effect in January 2013, has a provision that requires employers to share in the responsibility of providing health insurance to its full-time employees. Some educational institutions in their efforts to save estimated health care costs are now taking additional steps to save cash, yet at the expense of already under-resourced adjunct college instructors.

Youngstown State University is the second institution in recent weeks to announce it will cut its adjuncts’ hours to avoid paying Affordable Care Act-related costs. In a campus wide memo last Thursday, a portion of the memo reads, “Effective this academic year, part-time faculty will not be allowed to teach more than 24 hours over fall, spring and summer.” The Ohio university announced its plan a few weeks after Community College of Allegheny County (CCAC) made a similar announcement.

The Pennsylvania college made their unwelcomed announcement to faculty and staff members in an email message on November 20. For CCAC, slashing adjuncts’ work hours seemed a good way to avoid an estimated $6 million in employee health care costs that would kick in once the Affordable Care Act’s employer-as-payer directive begins in January 2013....

Colleges cut adjuncts' hours to avoid Affordable Care Act laws and costs - National Higher Education | Examiner.com

Good Post Bo and I fear this is what going to happen to business all across this country.

The ACA is going to be anything but affordable for those of us who actually contribute to or buy our own HC.

What a clusterfuck. What does one expect from a bill that they had to pass before anyone knew what the **** was in it?? A bill that none of thus dumbfuck Democrats bothered to read?? Assholes one and all.

 

[Ravi]

Here's an example of where jarhead is correct..

I opened a preschool with my son's mom a couple years ago. When she hires a new employee it's a static return because she's still charging the same per child regardless how motivated the employee is.

But that's just an example of why there's variables in this. I can hire a new employee and if he busts his ass and we get a project done quicker, my return increases.

It all depends on the business.

right, so the employee has to have a benefit. Either the employee gives the boss more free time and she is willing to pay the cost, or the employee will enable the pre-school to enroll more children.

 

[g5000]

"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.

That right there would have gotten you fired, asshole. It's completely wrong.

See Section 1513 of the PPACA.

.