[quote]countingbeans wrote:
[quote]phaethon wrote:
Not really sustainable. If it was then you were not being efficient and it is a good thing that you let go the two extra people.
[/quote]
I assume all your vast experience in business management has lead to this conclusion?[/quote]
I have over twenty years experience in IT project management. So I know a thing or two about resourcing, running a successful project, and about outsourcing.
[quote]phaethon wrote:
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
[quote]phaethon wrote:
Not really sustainable. If it was then you were not being efficient and it is a good thing that you let go the two extra people.
[/quote]
I assume all your vast experience in business management has lead to this conclusion?[/quote]
I have over twenty years experience in IT project management. So I know a thing or two about resourcing, running a successful project, and about outsourcing.[/quote]
oooohhhhh My bad, I forgot, finite projects are totally the same as running a business.
Right, right, silly me.
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
[quote]phaethon wrote:
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
You been at a place 3 years, got a $1 raise every year, and now all the people who just started make $1 less than you? You don’t want a raise?
Think man, you are smarter than this.
[/quote]
The truth is that jobs paying minimum wage (well almost) are based around skills that can be picked up within a matter of weeks. Someone with 2 years experience is worth little more than someone who has been there 3 months.
And as soon as you get a more reasonable gap people don’t tend to demand a raise in kind.
Not to mention that they might want a raise but it does not mean they will get one.[/quote]
Truth is, you didn’t even come close at actually addressing the issue except for some school book nonsense.
We are talking about the real world here.
Please try again.[/quote]
I have worked in countries with significantly higher minimum wages. The kind of situation you are talking about doesn’t really happen. I’ve worked long enough to be in a position of “management” during fairly serious minimum wage increases and it doesn’t pan out like you claim.
The interesting thing I have learned is that some unions pay wages based on a multiple of minimum wage. Seems a stupid thing for the employer to agree to. And that will have an effect. I don’t really work in a unionized industry.
[quote]dmaddox wrote:
US GAAP is CRAAP. So Complicated even CPAs and FASB even argue over what it means.[/quote]
You have to understand what GAAP is, what it started as and what its purpose is.
It really isn’t all that bad, lol.
Once you grasp the basic concepts the rest of it falls into place.
I will say that truly “getting” audit will make GAAP more clear.
[quote]phaethon wrote:
I have worked in countries with significantly higher minimum wages. The kind of situation you are talking about doesn’t really happen. I’ve worked long enough to be in a position of “management” during fairly serious minimum wage increases and it doesn’t pan out like you claim.
[/quote]
Nope, never happens. People never compare what they make, nor feel they are worth more than others. Nope never. That isn’t at all why people can be fired for having wage conversations.
You can stick your fingers in your ears and say “but no” all you want. It happens, and anyone that thinks it won’t is literally lying to themselves.
I worked for min wage, asked for raises, been asked for raise, negotiated them, argued for them and agaisnt them for other people.
But yes, you are right. All that time as a project manager and in other countries, you know where things are totally apples to apples, makes it so…
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
[quote]dmaddox wrote:
US GAAP is CRAAP. So Complicated even CPAs and FASB even argue over what it means.[/quote]
You have to understand what GAAP is, what it started as and what its purpose is.
It really isn’t all that bad, lol.
Once you grasp the basic concepts the rest of it falls into place.
I will say that truly “getting” audit will make GAAP more clear. [/quote]
It was a joke. The first word that came to mind that rhymed with GAAP was Craap. I think the original GAAP was good, but a lot has been added and it can get a bit muddy. I am a finance guy so I just take my revenue subtract expenses (what an expense is can get tricky) and I have my EBITDA. That is what I really care about and how much cash I have access to.
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
oooohhhhh My bad, I forgot, finite projects are totally the same as running a business.
Right, right, silly me. [/quote]
I’ve never pretended they were. I don’t know a lot of things about running a business.
I am experienced with resourcing. And I have been talking about what are essentially resourcing issues.
Do you have a point or not?
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
Nope, never happens. People never compare what they make, nor feel they are worth more than others. Nope never. That isn’t at all why people can be fired for having wage conversations.
You can stick your fingers in your ears and say “but no” all you want. It happens, and anyone that thinks it won’t is literally lying to themselves.
[/quote]
You are talking straight past me. You have not put forth any logical reason why events will pan out as you think. I have said in many similar situations it has not happened on any kind of widespread basis as you expect it will.
You are basically saying “I know x will happen. I refuse to provide any significant evidence. And I cannot make a well reasoned argument to support it. But anyone who disagrees is literally lying to themselves”
[quote]phaethon wrote:
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
oooohhhhh My bad, I forgot, finite projects are totally the same as running a business.
Right, right, silly me. [/quote]
I’ve never pretended they were. I don’t know a lot of things about running a business.
I am experienced with resourcing. And I have been talking about what are essentially resourcing issues.
Do you have a point or not?
[/quote]
My point? That your rebuttal to the option of cutting labor force to deal with the costs increase wasn’t sustainable isn’t based in reality.
As you should know, you have a set amount of resources with which to work. If person A can’t get the job done, you find someone who can.
In today’s world getting 8 people to do the work of what you used to have 10 do is the norm, not an exception. This isn’t Reagan’s economy or Clinton’s…
[quote]phaethon wrote:
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
Nope, never happens. People never compare what they make, nor feel they are worth more than others. Nope never. That isn’t at all why people can be fired for having wage conversations.
You can stick your fingers in your ears and say “but no” all you want. It happens, and anyone that thinks it won’t is literally lying to themselves.
[/quote]
You are talking straight past me. You have not put forth any logical reason why events will pan out as you think. I have said in many similar situations it has not happened on any kind of widespread basis as you expect it will.
You are basically saying “I know x will happen. I refuse to provide any significant evidence. And I cannot make a well reasoned argument to support it. But anyone who disagrees is literally lying to themselves”[/quote]
If you had a well reasoned arguement beside “because I said so” please point it out. Funny that you’ve present the same arguement I have, and are trying to say mine good enough.
Anyway. I present the 4 options a business owner has
Fact of the matter is, everyone is going to do 1 of the above or a combination of any or all of the 4. A combination of the 4 more likely than not. So this means the effects of a 28% increase in those specific costs will be spread over more than one measure.
Now you can sit here and pull stats that support either point fo view from the same pool of data, you can link studies from college professionals that have never actually spent a day off the tit of the state, or you can point out macro summaries and evaluations from any right or left wing hack economist all you want.
Sally Business owner doesn’t give two shits about any of that, because in the real world, things don’t work like the text book says, or like the study says, or like Johnny PHD says.
All this does is force the hand of the market, and we’ve all seen how great that is when the thrid party forcing the hand has zero to lose in the situation.
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
[quote]phaethon wrote:
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
Nope, never happens. People never compare what they make, nor feel they are worth more than others. Nope never. That isn’t at all why people can be fired for having wage conversations.
You can stick your fingers in your ears and say “but no” all you want. It happens, and anyone that thinks it won’t is literally lying to themselves.
[/quote]
You are talking straight past me. You have not put forth any logical reason why events will pan out as you think. I have said in many similar situations it has not happened on any kind of widespread basis as you expect it will.
You are basically saying “I know x will happen. I refuse to provide any significant evidence. And I cannot make a well reasoned argument to support it. But anyone who disagrees is literally lying to themselves”[/quote]
If you had a well reasoned arguement beside “because I said so” please point it out. Funny that you’ve present the same arguement I have, and are trying to say mine good enough.
Anyway. I present the 4 options a business owner has
Fact of the matter is, everyone is going to do 1 of the above or a combination of any or all of the 4. A combination of the 4 more likely than not. So this means the effects of a 28% increase in those specific costs will be spread over more than one measure.
Now you can sit here and pull stats that support either point fo view from the same pool of data, you can link studies from college professionals that have never actually spent a day off the tit of the state, or you can point out macro summaries and evaluations from any right or left wing hack economist all you want.
Sally Business owner doesn’t give two shits about any of that, because in the real world, things don’t work like the text book says, or like the study says, or like Johnny PHD says.
All this does is force the hand of the market, and we’ve all seen how great that is when the thrid party forcing the hand has zero to lose in the situation.
[/quote]
I get it , but what is your point ? Business is already running as efficiently as possible , it will probably be less profit for owner and if he can not take the hit the business will go to some one that can take the hit
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
I get it , but what is your point ? [/quote]
Well, for one, none of this helps growth, and without growth we either continue to stagnate with high unemployment or unemployment goes up. This doesn’t solve any problems.
Playing with government mandated wage does jack and shit to help the economy. People will argue till they are blue in the face as to whether it hurts, but in the end, thsi doesn’t fix anything. And the consequences of it may be worse than the situation is now.
Now I know lefties tend to not bother to think about consequences, but they happen and matter.
San Francisco has the highest minimum wage, while the state enjoys the highest poverty rate and worst business climate in the nation.
[quote]MaximusB wrote:
San Francisco has the highest minimum wage, while the state enjoys the highest poverty rate and worst business climate in the nation. [/quote]
It illustrates Pitt’s point perfectly…all your businesses leave the place with the higher cost and come to places like Utah who have a friendly business environment.
But jee guys, what if the U.S. stops being a friendly business environment…where will the business go?
I wonder.
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
I get it , but what is your point ? [/quote]
Well, for one, none of this helps growth, and without growth [/quote]
what helps growth ?
[quote]MaximusB wrote:
San Francisco has the highest minimum wage, while the state enjoys the highest poverty rate and worst business climate in the nation. [/quote]
Wikipedia disagrees with you Maxi
[quote]UtahLama wrote:
[quote]MaximusB wrote:
San Francisco has the highest minimum wage, while the state enjoys the highest poverty rate and worst business climate in the nation. [/quote]
It illustrates Pitt’s point perfectly…all your businesses leave the place with the higher cost and come to places like Utah who have a friendly business environment.
But jee guys, what if the U.S. stops being a friendly business environment…where will the business go?
I wonder.[/quote]
click on economy , wiki has a differing opinion
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
[quote]UtahLama wrote:
[quote]MaximusB wrote:
San Francisco has the highest minimum wage, while the state enjoys the highest poverty rate and worst business climate in the nation. [/quote]
It illustrates Pitt’s point perfectly…all your businesses leave the place with the higher cost and come to places like Utah who have a friendly business environment.
But jee guys, what if the U.S. stops being a friendly business environment…where will the business go?
I wonder.[/quote]
click on economy , wiki has a differing opinion
[/quote]
Pitt, we have businesses and wealthy folks moving here from Cali every year…your liberal utopia is driving them out in droves. The state economy is in the shitter.
Business will go where the grass is greener, and soon with the policies we are enacting the U.S. is gonna be one big brown field.
[quote]UtahLama wrote:
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
[quote]UtahLama wrote:
[quote]MaximusB wrote:
San Francisco has the highest minimum wage, while the state enjoys the highest poverty rate and worst business climate in the nation. [/quote]
It illustrates Pitt’s point perfectly…all your businesses leave the place with the higher cost and come to places like Utah who have a friendly business environment.
But jee guys, what if the U.S. stops being a friendly business environment…where will the business go?
I wonder.[/quote]
click on economy , wiki has a differing opinion
[/quote]
Pitt, we have businesses and wealthy folks moving here from Cali every year…your liberal utopia is driving them out in droves. The state economy is in the shitter.
Business will go where the grass is greener, and soon with the policies we are enacting the U.S. is gonna be one big brown field.
[/quote]
so do we and I bet they have business moving from UT and AZ to Cali all the time also
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
[quote]UtahLama wrote:
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
[quote]UtahLama wrote:
[quote]MaximusB wrote:
San Francisco has the highest minimum wage, while the state enjoys the highest poverty rate and worst business climate in the nation. [/quote]
It illustrates Pitt’s point perfectly…all your businesses leave the place with the higher cost and come to places like Utah who have a friendly business environment.
But jee guys, what if the U.S. stops being a friendly business environment…where will the business go?
I wonder.[/quote]
click on economy , wiki has a differing opinion
[/quote]
Pitt, we have businesses and wealthy folks moving here from Cali every year…your liberal utopia is driving them out in droves. The state economy is in the shitter.
Business will go where the grass is greener, and soon with the policies we are enacting the U.S. is gonna be one big brown field.
[/quote]
so do we and I bet they have business moving from UT and AZ to Cali all the time also
[/quote]
Why would they? Higher cost of land and living, higher taxes, more unions, and a state government that is going to have to jack up taxes even further to avoid default.
LOL yep I’m sure they are FLOCKING there.