Page 47 of 64 FirstFirst ...
37
45
46
47
48
49
57
... LastLast
  1. #921
    Oh look, businesses are finding it harder to weasel out of paying healthcare... boohoohoo.

    Also, my friends and I agree that Domino's has been far superior to Papa John's since they've stepped up their game.
    Q: Where the fuck is Xia Xia, SIU?!?!
    A1: She needs to start making eggs for Easter...
    A2: Drunk and sleeping somewhere.

  2. #922
    Quote Originally Posted by KDSwain View Post
    The new reality is that low-income, low-skilled workers will be trapped. They will no longer be able to find 40 hour/week jobs. It will cost too much to keep them. For the past month I have been reorganizing our workforce. Our employees will be finding out next month that we will no longer have full-time employees as of Jan 1, 2013. Everyone will be on 7 hour shifts, 4 days a week. We will have to do this to survive as a contract company.

    Elections have consequences, this is just the start of them.
    Romney would not have been inaugurated until January 20th. The lay off threats are not based on reality, because even if Romney won, Obama would still be president. Further more, anything Romney would do is pure speculation, because he never set a policy. What would it take for you to take credit for mismanaging your business, as a cause for these lay offs, instead of the government? I do not know of a single place that is laying people off. None of my friends, none of my relatives. Boing just announced several thousand jobs in our area. What do all these employers do, to not be effected by Obama, but your place of business is? When do you pay for the failures running your job, instead of it's employees?

    This is nothing but retaliation by folks who were guarantied a win and are now showing the exact reason why 'job creators' are nothing but a joke. Want to make Atlus shrug? Go for it, plenty of places that are willing to take your business.

    ---------- Post added 2012-11-17 at 03:42 AM ----------

    Are employees tax deductible? Also, is the employer end of health insurance, also tax deductible?

  3. #923
    Legendary! KrazyK923's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Illinois
    Posts
    6,917
    But Papa Johns has enough money to pay for his 2 million pizza's advertising thing.

    I like how NOW they're suddenly realizing this huge issue they are supposedly facing, despite the fact that Obamacare (Which is what they're blaming) has been in law for almost 2 years.

    Hint: Its called they're being utterly and totally disingenuous because their guy didn't win.

  4. #924
    Quote Originally Posted by KrazyK923 View Post
    But Papa Johns has enough money to pay for his 2 million pizza's advertising thing.

    I like how NOW they're suddenly realizing this huge issue they are supposedly facing, despite the fact that Obamacare (Which is what they're blaming) has been in law for almost 2 years.




    Hint: Its called they're being utterly and totally disingenuous because their guy didn't win.


    Not really, although it was passed
    2 years ago for the most part it's not in effect and a lot of big companies were waiting on the outcome of the election to make some serious decisions about the future.

  5. #925
    Banned smrund's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    In the state of Denial.
    Posts
    15,457
    Quote Originally Posted by Zigzagzoom View Post
    Not really, although it was passed
    2 years ago for the most part it's not in effect and a lot of big companies were waiting on the outcome of the election to make some serious decisions about the future.
    So far, I haven't heard a single company issue a public statement that sounded serious. Most of them sound like babies crying because they didn't get their bottle.

  6. #926
    Legendary! KrazyK923's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Illinois
    Posts
    6,917
    Quote Originally Posted by Zigzagzoom View Post
    Not really, although it was passed
    2 years ago for the most part it's not in effect and a lot of big companies were waiting on the outcome of the election to make some serious decisions about the future.
    Its exactly what they're doing. They are throwing a hissy fit because their guy lost.

    If they were so worried about this, using Obamacare as an excuse, you'd figure you would have heard a whole lot more about it right before/during/after it was passed.

    But you didn't. You heard the Papa John guy being butthurt on Faux News during the debate, talking about OH NOES HE'LL HAVE TO RAISE THE PRICE OF HIS SHITTY PIZZA 14 CENTS, but nothing about layoffs/reduced hours.

    They are throwing tantrums because they lost.

    The legitimately sad thing is that people are losing their jobs because their bosses are partisan fucks.

  7. #927
    Quote Originally Posted by smrund View Post
    So far, I haven't heard a single company issue a public statement that sounded serious. Most of them sound like babies crying because they didn't get their bottle.
    Well I suppose whether or not each is serious remains to be seen. Time will tell.

  8. #928
    Quote Originally Posted by Zigzagzoom View Post
    Well I suppose whether or not each is serious remains to be seen. Time will tell.
    No, time will not tell, because we do not know and will never know what Romney would have done. There is no current necessity to make any changes because even if Romney now, they would have to wait until January 20th for Romney to do anything. If they were not going to lay off people right now if Romney won, there is nothing that is different at this moment that should lead them to lay offs, other than spite.

  9. #929
    Quote Originally Posted by Felya420 View Post
    No, time will not tell, because we do not know and will never know what Romney would have done. There is no current necessity to make any changes because even if Romney now, they would have to wait until January 20th for Romney to do anything. If they were not going to lay off people right now if Romney won, there is nothing that is different at this moment that should lead them to lay offs, other than spite.
    Time will tell if anyone is serious about layoffs/scale backs/surcharges ect.

  10. #930
    Quote Originally Posted by Zigzagzoom View Post
    Time will tell if anyone is serious about layoffs/scale backs/surcharges ect.
    But, time cannot tell if they would have done the same under Romney. Time cannot tell if these lay offs are the result of Obama policy or a thrust of power by a corporation against a democratically elected president.

  11. #931
    Banned smrund's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    In the state of Denial.
    Posts
    15,457
    Quote Originally Posted by Zigzagzoom View Post
    Well I suppose whether or not each is serious remains to be seen. Time will tell.
    They may be "serious" in the sense that they'll go through with it. But it's hard to take grown men acting in such a manner "seriously".

  12. #932
    It's irrelevant to me, only thing that matters is here and now and down the road. So yea, time will tell.

  13. #933
    Quote Originally Posted by Laize View Post
    I am so sick of people bringing that bogus website up.

    Let me enlighten you to some facts.

    Here's the Department of Labor's actual chart on minimum wage historical rates.

    Let's look at when the minimum wage was $.25 in 1938. If you plug that into the US Bureau of Labor Statistics' inflation calculator you'll see that the 1938 minimum wage of $.25 equates to about 4.10 today.

    In 1950, when the minimum wage was at the height of its purchasing power, it was $.75, or $7.20 in today's dollars.

    The minimum wage has, historically, fluctuated around a $6-$8 (in 2012 dollars) rate. The point that the "raise the minimum wage" people like to start their charts at is the late 60s and 70s when, for a brief time, the purchasing power of the minimum wage was artificially inflated to ridiculous purchasing power of $10-$11 in today's dollars.

    You'll find that it didn't last long either as inflation quickly normalized it back to its classical rate.

    I'm just so tired of explaining this uncomfortable fact to minimum wage advocates every time it comes up.

    You dont need to explain anything, just plug some of your quoted numbers in and you will see how far behind min wage is today.

    1 dollar 1956 ==>> $8.50

    1.15 in 1961 ==>> $8.90

    1.25 in 1963 ==>> $9.45

    1.40 in 1967 ==>> $9.70

    1.60 in 1968 ==>> $10.64

    It is pretty obvious when you even study the numbers you linked to that it hasnt kept pace with inflation, I mean last time i checked we didnt have 10 dollar min wage, If anything it needs to be raised to about 12-13 dollars and ontop of that it needs to be automatically adjusted for inflation.

  14. #934
    Hey!

    Let's be mad at Boeing now!

    "Boeing announced a major restructuring of its defense division on Wednesday that will cut 30 percent of management jobs from 2010 levels, close facilities in California and consolidate several business units to cut costs."

    http://www.cnbc.com/id/49729998/Boei...fense_Division

    I feel like I might be doing this for awhile. Damn those businesses.

  15. #935
    Old God Grizzly Willy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Kenosha, Wisconsin
    Posts
    10,210
    A bit late there Riidii.

  16. #936
    Quote Originally Posted by Grokan View Post
    A bit late there Riidii.
    Did someone already post it? I wasn't sure if people knew.

  17. #937
    Quote Originally Posted by Riidii View Post
    Hey!

    Let's be mad at Boeing now!

    "Boeing announced a major restructuring of its defense division on Wednesday that will cut 30 percent of management jobs from 2010 levels, close facilities in California and consolidate several business units to cut costs."

    http://www.cnbc.com/id/49729998/Boei...fense_Division

    I feel like I might be doing this for awhile. Damn those businesses.
    It's almost as if we're winding down our involvement in two wars that we've been fighting simultaneously for nearly a decade.

  18. #938
    Quote Originally Posted by Riidii View Post
    Hey!

    Let's be mad at Boeing now!

    "Boeing announced a major restructuring of its defense division on Wednesday that will cut 30 percent of management jobs from 2010 levels, close facilities in California and consolidate several business units to cut costs."

    http://www.cnbc.com/id/49729998/Boei...fense_Division

    I feel like I might be doing this for awhile. Damn those businesses.
    Except that has nothing to do with Obamacare. At best you're entirely off topic.
    Quote Originally Posted by Nixx View Post
    Everyone is pro-US. They just don't know it yet.
    Quote Originally Posted by Fyre View Post
    Internet lives in the sky, don't need no cables for that.
    A nice list of logical fallacies. In picture form!

  19. #939
    Quote Originally Posted by Wells View Post
    Except that has nothing to do with Obamacare. At best you're entirely off topic.
    Notice how they don't mention why they are cutting costs.

    Smart move Boeing.

  20. #940
    Quote Originally Posted by Riidii View Post
    Notice how they don't mention why they are cutting costs.

    Smart move Boeing.
    Yeah I guess they didn't figure anyone would be confused why a company that makes fully half of its money on war machines might be making less money when there aren't as many wars going on.

    Because, you know. The title of the article is:
    Boeing Announces Big Layoffs in Defense Division
    Defense Division
    DEFENSE DIVISION
    DEFENSE
    DIVISION
    Clearly its Obama's fault.
    Quote Originally Posted by Nixx View Post
    Everyone is pro-US. They just don't know it yet.
    Quote Originally Posted by Fyre View Post
    Internet lives in the sky, don't need no cables for that.
    A nice list of logical fallacies. In picture form!

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •