quote:

ORIGINAL: Lucylastic

and fuck people over
YAY

quote:

ORIGINAL: RottenJohnny

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lucylastic

So
you have someone in a union job or out it doesnt matter... works his 40 a week, has a wife and three kids, a mortgage, 2 cars, cos they work separate shifts, hes been doing the job for fifteen years, pays lousy conditions are lousy, price of everything seems to double he has no savings, debt up to his eyeballs, cant afford time off to get a better education, has an idea for a business, but doesnt want to get deeper in debt.
How (without blaming him for not planning better) does he go about it? during the setup, the legal issues, getting a website, paying a lawyer, a company, suppliers, customers?

Depends on the type of business. I've been self-employed since I was 18. All it took was doing a little homework on business ownership and $10 every 5 years to keep my business registered. I didn't need a lawyer, I don't have a website, my suppliers ship to my home, and I can write off a portion of my costs of living directly off my taxes. Getting customers takes ground pounding and some actual ambition but it can be done.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: Zonie63

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
No one is forced to work at a specific place. Everyone chooses to work where they work. Ya'all might think that you have to be able to afford X, Y, and Z, or else you aren't getting paid enough. That's not true. There are almost always ways to reduce X, Y and Z to get within your budget. I know people who skipped cable so they could use those resources in areas they felt were more important. Just because you want X, Y, and Z doesn't mean your employer has to pay you enough to have them.

What you're saying is true, but isn't it also just as true from the other side as well? No one is forcing the employer to pay lousy wages. The employer could pay higher wages and do without X, Y, and Z himself, couldn't he/she? And if he/she doesn't do that, isn't it the employees' right to call him/her a cheap bastard?

The difference is, it's the employer's business. That's the difference. You want to call the shots? Start the business. When it's your business, and your capital that's on the line, you get to make the rules (to an extent).

quote:

ORIGINAL: Zonie63

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: Zonie63

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
No one is forced to work at a specific place. Everyone chooses to work where they work. Ya'all might think that you have to be able to afford X, Y, and Z, or else you aren't getting paid enough. That's not true. There are almost always ways to reduce X, Y and Z to get within your budget. I know people who skipped cable so they could use those resources in areas they felt were more important. Just because you want X, Y, and Z doesn't mean your employer has to pay you enough to have them.

What you're saying is true, but isn't it also just as true from the other side as well? No one is forcing the employer to pay lousy wages. The employer could pay higher wages and do without X, Y, and Z himself, couldn't he/she? And if he/she doesn't do that, isn't it the employees' right to call him/her a cheap bastard?

The difference is, it's the employer's business. That's the difference. You want to call the shots? Start the business. When it's your business, and your capital that's on the line, you get to make the rules (to an extent).

If and when a business wants to start its own country on its own island somewhere, then they can call the shots. If they want to do it in a country where other people live, then it's not all theirs.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lucylastic

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lucylastic
So
you have someone in a union job or out it doesnt matter... works his 40 a week, has a wife and three kids, a mortgage, 2 cars, cos they work separate shifts, hes been doing the job for fifteen years, pays lousy conditions are lousy, price of everything seems to double he has no savings, debt up to his eyeballs, cant afford time off to get a better education, has an idea for a business, but doesnt want to get deeper in debt.
How (without blaming him for not planning better) does he go about it? during the setup, the legal issues, getting a website, paying a lawyer, a company, suppliers, customers?

Gee, I don't know, start small, maybe? Start small and build up to the other stuff?
How small? how legal? build up with what a customer a year? a customer a month? take a class or apply for school to get the business management out of the way...good idea? do you know how long it takes to get a business up to par when you have no money behind you?? If you are going to get an education, and take out a student loan for how many years and get further into debt? cos starting your business is a sure fire way to prosperity isnt it?
say one of the kids get sick, spouse has to quit a job to look after them, because her employer is non union and threatened him or her with the boot if they miss more time, so theres more pressure, more stress less money, less time, less concentration?
Your car explodes but the spouse needs a car to get the kids to school and hospital appointments or god forbid YOU get sick or have an accident.
Putting everything into an education and a business is not easy, and yeah I do know what its like
Nah. That doesn't work.
So, what you're saying is that this guy, this gal, this couple isn't going to put in the extraordinary effort it usually takes to get a business off the ground, but they'll bitch and moan that they aren't treated properly by the ones who have put that effort in.
Now please show me where I said anything like that???? quit playing strawman
That sounds perfectly shitty for the business owner.

• A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  
• Personal Responsibility
  
• Help for the truly needy
  
• Limited Government
  
• Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)
  

quote:

ORIGINAL: Zonie63

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: Zonie63

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
No one is forced to work at a specific place. Everyone chooses to work where they work. Ya'all might think that you have to be able to afford X, Y, and Z, or else you aren't getting paid enough. That's not true. There are almost always ways to reduce X, Y and Z to get within your budget. I know people who skipped cable so they could use those resources in areas they felt were more important. Just because you want X, Y, and Z doesn't mean your employer has to pay you enough to have them.

What you're saying is true, but isn't it also just as true from the other side as well? No one is forcing the employer to pay lousy wages. The employer could pay higher wages and do without X, Y, and Z himself, couldn't he/she? And if he/she doesn't do that, isn't it the employees' right to call him/her a cheap bastard?

The difference is, it's the employer's business. That's the difference. You want to call the shots? Start the business. When it's your business, and your capital that's on the line, you get to make the rules (to an extent).

If and when a business wants to start its own country on its own island somewhere, then they can call the shots. If they want to do it in a country where other people live, then it's not all theirs.

• A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  
• Personal Responsibility
  
• Help for the truly needy
  
• Limited Government
  
• Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)
  

quote:

ORIGINAL: Owner59

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lucylastic
and fuck people over
YAY

Look how the right celebrates any company or person who fucks America........putin......romney......multinational douche-bag companies.....etc...etc....etc....
When will these jerks start supporting America...... and Americans?
I blame their parents.....

• A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  
• Personal Responsibility
  
• Help for the truly needy
  
• Limited Government
  
• Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)
  

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: Owner59
Look how the right celebrates any company or person who fucks America........putin......romney......multinational douche-bag companies.....etc...etc....etc....
When will these jerks start supporting America...... and Americans?
I blame their parents.....

Wichita, KS. actually is in America. Now, I can't state this in any way other than as a pure guess, but I'm going to put it out there, that the dealership employs Americans. If the drywall company chosen was full of illegal immigrants, then there is a law being broken and the dealership should be held accountable. Otherwise, those "jerks" were supporting Americans, while the Union was advocating for only supporting their brethren, not all Americans.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Owner59

quote:

ORIGINAL: Zonie63

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: Zonie63

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
No one is forced to work at a specific place. Everyone chooses to work where they work. Ya'all might think that you have to be able to afford X, Y, and Z, or else you aren't getting paid enough. That's not true. There are almost always ways to reduce X, Y and Z to get within your budget. I know people who skipped cable so they could use those resources in areas they felt were more important. Just because you want X, Y, and Z doesn't mean your employer has to pay you enough to have them.

What you're saying is true, but isn't it also just as true from the other side as well? No one is forcing the employer to pay lousy wages. The employer could pay higher wages and do without X, Y, and Z himself, couldn't he/she? And if he/she doesn't do that, isn't it the employees' right to call him/her a cheap bastard?

The difference is, it's the employer's business. That's the difference. You want to call the shots? Start the business. When it's your business, and your capital that's on the line, you get to make the rules (to an extent).

If and when a business wants to start its own country on its own island somewhere, then they can call the shots. If they want to do it in a country where other people live, then it's not all theirs.

I`m going to steal that line......pretty much sums up what takes me at least a paragraph for me to explain....

quote:

ORIGINAL: RottenJohnny

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: Owner59
Look how the right celebrates any company or person who fucks America........putin......romney......multinational douche-bag companies.....etc...etc....etc....
When will these jerks start supporting America...... and Americans?
I blame their parents.....

Wichita, KS. actually is in America. Now, I can't state this in any way other than as a pure guess, but I'm going to put it out there, that the dealership employs Americans. If the drywall company chosen was full of illegal immigrants, then there is a law being broken and the dealership should be held accountable. Otherwise, those "jerks" were supporting Americans, while the Union was advocating for only supporting their brethren, not all Americans.

I was beginning to wonder if I missed the memo that says, "If you're not in a labor union, you're not an American!"

• A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  
• Personal Responsibility
  
• Help for the truly needy
  
• Limited Government
  
• Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)
  

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

<snip cos I hate nested on nested posts>
So, what you're saying is that this guy, this gal, this couple isn't going to put in the extraordinary effort it usually takes to get a business off the ground, but they'll bitch and moan that they aren't treated properly by the ones who have put that effort in.
Now please show me where I said anything like that???? quit playing strawman

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: Zonie63

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: Zonie63

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
No one is forced to work at a specific place. Everyone chooses to work where they work. Ya'all might think that you have to be able to afford X, Y, and Z, or else you aren't getting paid enough. That's not true. There are almost always ways to reduce X, Y and Z to get within your budget. I know people who skipped cable so they could use those resources in areas they felt were more important. Just because you want X, Y, and Z doesn't mean your employer has to pay you enough to have them.

What you're saying is true, but isn't it also just as true from the other side as well? No one is forcing the employer to pay lousy wages. The employer could pay higher wages and do without X, Y, and Z himself, couldn't he/she? And if he/she doesn't do that, isn't it the employees' right to call him/her a cheap bastard?

The difference is, it's the employer's business. That's the difference. You want to call the shots? Start the business. When it's your business, and your capital that's on the line, you get to make the rules (to an extent).

If and when a business wants to start its own country on its own island somewhere, then they can call the shots. If they want to do it in a country where other people live, then it's not all theirs.

Thus the "to an extent" part. Isn't it a better idea for a business to come to a certain decision on it's own rather than under threat of penalty from government? Or, do you agree that the "ends justify the means" in employee remuneration situations?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lucylastic

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
<snip cos I hate nested on nested posts>
So, what you're saying is that this guy, this gal, this couple isn't going to put in the extraordinary effort it usually takes to get a business off the ground, but they'll bitch and moan that they aren't treated properly by the ones who have put that effort in. Now please show me where I said anything like that???? quit playing strawman

Nowhere did I claim you said anything like that. Sometimes, Lucy, it's not about you. You don't have to accept that, but it's the truth.

• A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  
• Personal Responsibility
  
• Help for the truly needy
  
• Limited Government
  
• Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)
  

quote:

ORIGINAL: Zonie63
The thing is, the government has to look at things from a big picture point of view, not just in terms of how a business decision might affect the economy, but also the political stability of the country. The business owner only cares about his/her little picture and may not know nor care about the big picture. It's not a question of the ends justifying the means, although historically, the business community has been notorious for not anticipating the consequences of their own actions. Even in situations where they could have prevented it, their stubborn greed led to strikes, riots, insurrections, and even revolutions in some countries.
Based on their historical track record, the business community just doesn't seem to have a clue when it comes to maintaining political harmony and stability in a society. Their myopic, reckless greed has brought down more than a few empires through the ages. It may not be what they want to do, but my point is that they don't know what they're doing. That's why it's rarely a good idea to let a business come to certain decisions on their own.
You seem to be arguing that when a business makes a decision, that it only affects them and their own private domain. But depending on the nature and size of the business, their decisions might have ripple effects throughout an entire community, state, country, or even the world as a whole.
It would be nice if they would exercise civic responsibility and restrain themselves for the good of society, before they face threats of penalty from the government or (worse still) the threat of angry workers on the verge of rioting in retaliation over bad treatment. If and when that ever happens, suddenly the business wants the government to intervene by sending cops or troops to restore order. That shows that they're not only short-sighted, but hypocritical as well, since they only advocate a "free" market as long as it's convenient for them and stacked in their favor. When faced with the consequences of their own irresponsibility and greed, they're the first ones to pressure the government to rescue them (even to the point of engineering overseas coups and other military actions for the sake of "U.S. interests").
This isn't about a single worker mopping floors for shitty wages and then whining about it. Nor is it really about an individual business owner making his/her own decisions in his/her own private domain. If it was really that simple, then sure, it would be easy to just say "let them eat cakes." But the larger issues are political stability and the survival of our country in a world of intense competition (and not just business competition either).

• A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  
• Personal Responsibility
  
• Help for the truly needy
  
• Limited Government
  
• Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)
  

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
You seem to be lumping every business into one category and making it sound like they all abuse their positions. That's simply not true.

quote:


You are also equating the free market system with the crony capitalism system that we have today. The more influence government exerts in the market, the more beneficial it is for business to attempt to sway government.

quote:


An interesting read here.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

http://autos.yahoo.com/blogs/motoramic/kansas-dealer-turns-labor-protest-into-free-advertising-200538690.html



That damn business community always figures out how to respond! LMAO!

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lucylastic
and fuck people over
YAY

Why do people continue to work for those businesses, then, Lucy?

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lucylastic
because they have to?
I dunno you ask em
making a stand against shitty employers only works if you can leave?

Who is making them work there? No one has to work for any specific employer. I don't know if it's different up North, but here in the States, no one is forcing anyone to work at a particular business.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lucylastic
life
rent, food, hydro, taxes, family obligations, life obligations,
specific employer?could it have something to do with the lack of jobs ?

Has there always been a "lack of jobs," Lucy?

Didn't think so.

What is stopping these people forced into working for a shitty company from getting a job at a "not shitty" company, or starting their own "not shitty" company?

Instead of pissing, moaning and bitching into their Corn Flakes, they could pull up their big boy/girl underwear/panties, and make their own life. Couldn't they?

quote:

ORIGINAL: joether

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lucylastic
because they have to?
I dunno you ask em
making a stand against shitty employers only works if you can leave?

Who is making them work there? No one has to work for any specific employer. I don't know if it's different up North, but here in the States, no one is forcing anyone to work at a particular business.

The conservative fallacy is on display here folks.....wait for it....

Tell me DesideriScuri, can you name.....ALL....the companies operating in that area that have good managers that are not assholes to their employees? When labor and management are having problems, its usually due to egos clashing against one and another.

Lucy brings up several good points, one of them being 'what is the job availability in that area?'. There might be a large swing in customer service jobs in that area, but those people are neither trained nor desire that sort of job. Its not about being picking, its about finding 'as good if not better' of a fit. Companies will overlook experience and skills, if the personalities fit together well between management and labor.

However, DS, you are also wrong on workers not being forced to work. There are plenty of contracts that sounded good in the beginning, but weeks or months in, and it sounds like crap. If they leave, there is usually a hefty financial cost attached to the decision. No one that I know of can look into the future with perfect accuracy and determine if their future job or contract will be a good one. But your stating the opposite more or less.