You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Hey Democrats, you want wage increases? How about applying the principles of free market economics.
- Thread starter wildchild
- Start date
I need 10 full-time equivalent at the sales counter during time Y to fill orders (in accordance with my company's vision and values). If the cost of utilizing those 10 rises, how many FTEs do I need to fill orders during time Y?Well the unknown here is how many lose their jobs permanently because of a rise in the minimum wage? Possibly similar wage hikes in the past can be used as a guide. Economists produce various estimates from near zero to some substantial number. I have seen comments in some studies, can't tell you where now, to the effect that job loss due to hikes in the minimum is temporary. That there is commonly a loss initially that dissipates within 6 months or so. It is probably not a very reliable thing to base what might happen nationally, but the economies are booming in those markets that have locally raised their minimums. I personally believe this will be the effect nationally, but it wouldn't happen overnight. And of course no sane person would contemplate making up a 31% wage loss in one fell swoop. Any big increase must be phased in to allow businesses time to adjust.
Sorry, it should be choice one, not choose one. Please excuse my horrible grammar.I'm not sure what my side is. Can you tell me? Choose one made me laugh.
The obvious answers are probably not correct, because in fact what is most probable isn't so obvious, but previous hikes in wages can serve as a guide. Assuming your business doesn't operate in a vacuum, there may be adjustments all along the line and your suppliers, customers and competition will all be affected, but to somewhat different extents. Assuming your sales counter people are low enough wage workers they may be personally impacted, but even if they aren't, either your suppliers or customers may be affected.I need 10 full-time equivalent at the sales counter during time Y to fill orders (in accordance with my company's vision and values). If the cost of utilizing those 10 rises, how many FTEs do I need to fill orders during time Y?
What happens in practice, depending on what the competition is doing, is that some fraction of the cost increase shows up as a price increase. (In many cases, low wage labor is a small to very small fraction of the final cost of a widget or service, but that may be a minor consideration in price increases. Companies may use hikes in the minimum as an opportunity to test the price waters.) Also, some of the additional operating cost may be absorbed at the top end via future executive compensation. In the happiest case, you would experience an increase in demand that more than makes up for any slight increase in operating cost, i.e., it is possible to end up in a financially stronger position by paying higher wages, depending on at what level your business fits into the food chain. But usually nearly all boats are lifted, some much more than others. That's what the history of increases in the minimum has told us.
Obviously wages can be too high and they can be too low. Right now they are far too low. The economy will get a huge shot in the arm from a wage boost. I give you my personal guarantee of that, so long as the increase in the minimum does not take us very far beyond the true cost of labor. No economist knows exactly where that is, but we can be 100% sure it is well beyond $7.25. Most likely it is in the $10-$12/hr area but higher still in some locations. Most businesses should either see some benefit or relatively little impact. Businesses that can only exist to the extent their labor is indirectly taxpayer subsidized may go under. Let's hope so!
Because of speaking with people who work in NICUs and people who attend births which are expected to be "risky"... I know that some children are born with ambiguous genitalia and therefore assigned a gender. Sometimes doctors perhaps make the wrong choice - although this happened more often in the past before DNA testing.
so..
as far as peoples identity really being different than their DNA... I see no reason to defer to the "experts" until someone produces information showing that it takes an expert opinion to understand how ones identity can differ from their DNA. For instance if scientists found a transgender gene... I would defer to the DNA experts on the subject of its existence and perhaps how the gene functions... unless and until I spent a long time educating myself on the subject.
As far as I know there is no esoteric information which needs expert interpretation outside of a DNA test.
Its all just opinion.
so..
as far as peoples identity really being different than their DNA... I see no reason to defer to the "experts" until someone produces information showing that it takes an expert opinion to understand how ones identity can differ from their DNA. For instance if scientists found a transgender gene... I would defer to the DNA experts on the subject of its existence and perhaps how the gene functions... unless and until I spent a long time educating myself on the subject.
As far as I know there is no esoteric information which needs expert interpretation outside of a DNA test.
Its all just opinion.
I think the experts, and I doubt any of us qualify, would say your sexual identity is something no one can assign to you but its something that arises naturally from your psyche, and your sexual identity, while almost always agreeing with your biology, doesn't always agree.
I am a firm believer in deferring to experts on matters that are not part of our everyday experience.
Piezoe... have you ever had employees whose income came out of your bottom line?
I have...
Have you ever owned a business with a front desk person or a clerk or an assistant.
Do you know what percentage of your profits paying a person salary can be for a small business. I know...
Your analysis is horrible slanted.
Most small business are labor cost intensive.... or service intensive and don't have big profit margins.
Unless you stamped your analysis hypthetical bullshit with no application to small or medium business your analysis would even get a failing graded at the Marx Engels Leninist studies department at the future Obama Soros Castro University in Cuba.
California is already losing jobs because of this.
Garment worker lost jobs in L.A.
U.C. Berkeley cut at least 500 jobs last week.
http://townhall.com/tipsheet/justin...o-cut-500-jobs-after-15-minimum-wage-n2149066
Finally... the last businesses that will go under are the ones who are working with democrats to do this. Like Wal Mart. The crones are allowing democrats to do this because it will destroy competition long term.
P.S.S.
if you team did not bring in a million workers a year plus allow millions of illegal workers... we would not need a govt mandated wage increase as the market would be taking care of it and our govt deficits could shrink. Our dollar would go up... and then fewer people would need to come here illegally because we would be buying more of the products they were making in their home country.
I have...
Have you ever owned a business with a front desk person or a clerk or an assistant.
Do you know what percentage of your profits paying a person salary can be for a small business. I know...
Your analysis is horrible slanted.
Most small business are labor cost intensive.... or service intensive and don't have big profit margins.
Unless you stamped your analysis hypthetical bullshit with no application to small or medium business your analysis would even get a failing graded at the Marx Engels Leninist studies department at the future Obama Soros Castro University in Cuba.
California is already losing jobs because of this.
Garment worker lost jobs in L.A.
U.C. Berkeley cut at least 500 jobs last week.
http://townhall.com/tipsheet/justin...o-cut-500-jobs-after-15-minimum-wage-n2149066
Finally... the last businesses that will go under are the ones who are working with democrats to do this. Like Wal Mart. The crones are allowing democrats to do this because it will destroy competition long term.
P.S.S.
if you team did not bring in a million workers a year plus allow millions of illegal workers... we would not need a govt mandated wage increase as the market would be taking care of it and our govt deficits could shrink. Our dollar would go up... and then fewer people would need to come here illegally because we would be buying more of the products they were making in their home country.
The obvious answers are probably not correct, because in fact what is most probable isn't so obvious, but previous hikes in wages can serve as a guide. Assuming your business doesn't operate in a vacuum, there may be adjustments all along the line and your suppliers, customers and competition will all be affected, but to somewhat different extents. Assuming your sales counter people are low enough wage workers they may be personally impacted, but even if they aren't, either your suppliers or customers may be affected.
What happens in practice, depending on what the competition is doing, is that some fraction of the cost increase shows up as a price increase. (In many cases, low wage labor is a small to very small fraction of the final cost of a widget or service, but that may be a minor consideration in price increases. Companies may use hikes in the minimum as an opportunity to test the price waters.) Also, some of the additional operating cost may be absorbed at the top end via future executive compensation. In the happiest case, you would experience an increase in demand that more than makes up for any slight increase in operating cost, i.e., it is possible to end up in a financially stronger position by paying higher wages, depending on at what level your business fits into the food chain. But usually nearly all boats are lifted, some much more than others. That's what the history of increases in the minimum has told us.
Obviously wages can be too high and they can be too low. Right now they are far too low. The economy will get a huge shot in the arm from a wage boost. I give you my personal guarantee of that, so long as the increase in the minimum does not take us very far beyond the true cost of labor. No economist knows exactly where that is, but we can be 100% sure it is well beyond $7.25. Most likely it is in the $10-$12/hr area but higher still in some locations. Most businesses should either see some benefit or relatively little impact. Businesses that can only exist to the extent their labor is indirectly taxpayer subsidized may go under. Let's hope so!
Piezoes possible responses..
a. show some intellectual backbone and google... and probably realize jem is correct... .
b. open troll playbook and pick an option... go with insult.
once again rather than go 2 posts deep a leftists opts for the troll playbook.
a. show some intellectual backbone and google... and probably realize jem is correct... .
b. open troll playbook and pick an option... go with insult.
once again rather than go 2 posts deep a leftists opts for the troll playbook.
It seems that you are loving proof that it is going to take an expert.
So is UC Berkeley the last college in California? In Berkeley?Piezoe... have you ever had employees whose income came out of your bottom line?
I have...
Have you ever owned a business with a front desk person or a clerk or an assistant.
Do you know what percentage of your profits paying a person salary can be for a small business. I know...
Your analysis is horrible slanted.
Most small business are labor cost intensive.... or service intensive and don't have big profit margins.
Unless you stamped your analysis hypthetical bullshit with no application to small or medium business your analysis would even get a failing graded at the Marx Engels Leninist studies department at the future Obama Soros Castro University in Cuba.
California is already losing jobs because of this.
Garment worker lost jobs in L.A.
U.C. Berkeley cut at least 500 jobs last week.
http://townhall.com/tipsheet/justin...o-cut-500-jobs-after-15-minimum-wage-n2149066
Finally... the last businesses that will go under are the ones who are working with democrats to do this. Like Wal Mart. The crones are allowing democrats to do this because it will destroy competition long term.
P.S.S.
if you team did not bring in a million workers a year plus allow millions of illegal workers... we would not need a govt mandated wage increase as the market would be taking care of it and our govt deficits could shrink. Our dollar would go up... and then fewer people would need to come here illegally because we would be buying more of the products they were making in their home country.