Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





Page 1 of 21 12311 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 419

Hybrid View

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    4,913
    vCash
    1500

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Where the smog meets the shore
    Posts
    30,873
    vCash
    1500
    Darden (Red Lobster, Olive Garden, etc.) takes in over $100 mil quarterly. I'm sure the others are similar. The fact that they pass the cost on to employees (or in some cases customers) is absolutely sickening. The problem with corporate greed in this country is that if a company makes $400 mil in profits in 2010 and $500 mil in 2011, anything under $600 mil in 2012 is deemed a failure, so they make cuts and changes based on increasing rather than maintaining or heaven forbid a minor loss for the sake of the good of the people.

    Much like the late 1800's, we're really entering an era of class warfare. ANd much like then, everyone asking for workers rights (used to be 2 day weekend and less than 12 hour work days, now its healthcare) will be cast off as an anti-capitalist commi and everyone on the other side is a rich spoiled elitist.

    Welcome back to the labor fight..... anti-greed and pro-human is just unAmerican socialism.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    4,913
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by GGGGG-Men View Post
    Darden (Red Lobster, Olive Garden, etc.) takes in over $100 mil quarterly. I'm sure the others are similar. The fact that they pass the cost on to employees (or in some cases customers) is absolutely sickening. The problem with corporate greed in this country is that if a company makes $400 mil in profits in 2010 and $500 mil in 2011, anything under $600 mil in 2012 is deemed a failure, so they make cuts and changes based on increasing rather than maintaining or heaven forbid a minor loss for the sake of the good of the people.

    Much like the late 1800's, we're really entering an era of class warfare. ANd much like then, everyone asking for workers rights (used to be 2 day weekend and less than 12 hour work days, now its healthcare) will be cast off as an anti-capitalist commi and everyone on the other side is a rich spoiled elitist.

    Welcome back to the labor fight..... anti-greed and pro-human is just unAmerican socialism.
    take a few minutes and watch this video

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YmqoC...ature=youtu.be

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    4,550
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by jmoney85 View Post
    take a few minutes and watch this video

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YmqoC...ature=youtu.be
    Friedman FTW.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    40,022
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by GGGGG-Men View Post
    Darden (Red Lobster, Olive Garden, etc.) takes in over $100 mil quarterly. I'm sure the others are similar. The fact that they pass the cost on to employees (or in some cases customers) is absolutely sickening. The problem with corporate greed in this country is that if a company makes $400 mil in profits in 2010 and $500 mil in 2011, anything under $600 mil in 2012 is deemed a failure, so they make cuts and changes based on increasing rather than maintaining or heaven forbid a minor loss for the sake of the good of the people.

    Much like the late 1800's, we're really entering an era of class warfare. ANd much like then, everyone asking for workers rights (used to be 2 day weekend and less than 12 hour work days, now its healthcare) will be cast off as an anti-capitalist commi and everyone on the other side is a rich spoiled elitist.

    Welcome back to the labor fight..... anti-greed and pro-human is just unAmerican socialism.
    On public companies yes they need constant growth. But even staying even in public private companies cutting costs is needed. It's not much different then buying a new machine to be more effective and laying off 3 people because of it.

    I do think this does have rhetoric and anti Obama slant to it. I'll reserve full judgement until we actually see if it holds up and sticks and if it works long term.

    Lots of companies are shifting there health insurance perks and it started before Obamacare as well. Lots of companies were shifting some of the burden of Health care on to the employee via paying for part of it, or higher premiums. Wife's company shifted to higher premiums and health savings account, and she pays for part of her health coverage. And the CEO is a big time Obama supporter. Just couldn't afford the cost anymore. So in 2013 we will have higher premiums and a health savings account. I like the health savings account myself and so does the wife.


    Come to psd where admitted dupes who do nothing but troll the gd and fs forum are free. But man don't you dare mention trolling on someone's wall.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Where the smog meets the shore
    Posts
    30,873
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by jmoney85 View Post
    take a few minutes and watch this video

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YmqoC...ature=youtu.be
    If the healthcare cost is passed on to employers it can end there. It doesn't need to keep getting passed on. Profit can still be had, it's just less profit. If the cost had always been there, it'd be a given, but now its a new cost for the business so they pass it on.

    They tried this with limits on working hours and days; passing on the cost lost in hours to decreasing pay. That's when labor unions stepped in to cut out the crap. This speech assumes all the money paid, for our purposes for healthcare, comes from profit, but profit is what is left, not what is used for payment of these costs. The business seeks to avoid a drop in profit by passing on any new costs to employees, not to avoid a loss.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    4,913
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by GGGGG-Men View Post
    If the healthcare cost is passed on to employers it can end there. It doesn't need to keep getting passed on. Profit can still be had, it's just less profit. If the cost had always been there, it'd be a given, but now its a new cost for the business so they pass it on.

    They tried this with limits on working hours and days; passing on the cost lost in hours to decreasing pay. That's when labor unions stepped in to cut out the crap. This speech assumes all the money paid, for our purposes for healthcare, comes from profit, but profit is what is left, not what is used for payment of these costs. The business seeks to avoid a drop in profit by passing on any new costs to employees, not to avoid a loss.
    Like I said previously... less profit means somebody is paying for it... which means people are paying for you to have the RIGHT to have health insurance... that is not morally right

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Where the smog meets the shore
    Posts
    30,873
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by jmoney85 View Post
    Like I said previously... less profit means somebody is paying for it... which means people are paying for you to have the RIGHT to have health insurance... that is not morally right
    Or, the business pays for it and the cost of it ends there. At their profits. The business is up $50 mil instead of $100 mil for the quarter. It doesn't have to go further than that. We're not talking operational costs, we're talking profit.

    I suck at economics, so feel free to point out my ignorance on what I'm missing here.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Where the smog meets the shore
    Posts
    30,873
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by jmoney85 View Post
    making others pay so you can have the RIGHT to have health insurance is immoral and unjust
    Nice spin. Well done. Horrible ethically, but well done nonetheless.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    9/13/14: #Mayhem (While Pacman fights Algieri in China. lol)
    Posts
    28,585
    vCash
    12274
    Quote Originally Posted by GGGGG-Men View Post
    Darden (Red Lobster, Olive Garden, etc.) takes in over $100 mil quarterly. I'm sure the others are similar. The fact that they pass the cost on to employees (or in some cases customers) is absolutely sickening. The problem with corporate greed in this country is that if a company makes $400 mil in profits in 2010 and $500 mil in 2011, anything under $600 mil in 2012 is deemed a failure, so they make cuts and changes based on increasing rather than maintaining or heaven forbid a minor loss for the sake of the good of the people.

    Much like the late 1800's, we're really entering an era of class warfare. ANd much like then, everyone asking for workers rights (used to be 2 day weekend and less than 12 hour work days, now its healthcare) will be cast off as an anti-capitalist commi and everyone on the other side is a rich spoiled elitist.

    Welcome back to the labor fight..... anti-greed and pro-human is just unAmerican socialism.
    1st bold: It's called capitalism, and it runs this country.

    2nd bold: If it isn't capitalism it's communism?

    3rd bold: anti-greed and pro-human are, in fact, un-human. Greed is as much a part of humanity as imperfection is. That's why we will ultimately be responsible for our own demise. We as a race are on a one way trip to extinction, and we are flooring the gas pedal the rest of the way.

    lol, Please' top 10 p4p: Mayweather/Marquez/Pacquiao/B-Hop/Ward/Rigondeaux/Wlad/Cotto/Froch/Maidana

    Boxing Fan? Come Discuss Boxing!

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    3,231
    vCash
    1500
    Why not do this before the election?

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    6,172
    vCash
    1500
    It seems to me, that both these chains have been losing money. The fact is that since Obamacare is being applied to every business in a same or similar position, any stress it might put on a business will be the same for all, so from a competitive positions, if has no effect. This is pure politics, not economics.
    Here is the question of the day, does anyone think that wealthy people should pay a lower percentage of their income to taxes than middle class people? Don't argue tax brackets, just a simple question. Do you think someone earning 46 million dollars should pay a lower percentage of their income than say someone earning sixty thousand?

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    4,913
    vCash
    1500
    making others pay so you can have the RIGHT to have health insurance is immoral and unjust

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    6,172
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by jmoney85 View Post
    making others pay so you can have the RIGHT to have health insurance is immoral and unjust
    Kind of like public schools huh? I have no children, but I have to pay for schools.
    Here is the question of the day, does anyone think that wealthy people should pay a lower percentage of their income to taxes than middle class people? Don't argue tax brackets, just a simple question. Do you think someone earning 46 million dollars should pay a lower percentage of their income than say someone earning sixty thousand?

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    3,231
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by cabernetluver View Post
    Kind of like public schools huh? I have no children, but I have to pay for schools.
    I always thought public schools help increase the value of your house. If you are in a good school district then you will see a big increase in your property value when you try to sell your house.

Page 1 of 21 12311 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

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