Economy 53,160 Posted June 1, 2015 Author Share Posted June 1, 2015 The minimum wage should rise. I don't care if the business owner ends up with half the profits made. They are a greedy f*cker anyw. YaUr not listening. Business owners AND workers get nothing out of this. This isnt helping the poor at all or making businesses pay more to workers... the Givernment would benefit from this only Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Economy 53,160 Posted June 1, 2015 Author Share Posted June 1, 2015 This is a false dilemma. You're suggesting that the difference between a large company being in the black or in the red is $1 per hour per minimum wage employee. That certainly isn't the case. Agreed. However its not helping. Its a tax on business and makes low skilled people 10% more expensive to hire even tho they arent getting anything else out of it at the very least if u need more revenue raise over-all taxes very slightly... Dont raise it on the hiring itself thats such a terrible idea Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Woolfsmck 2,763 Posted June 2, 2015 Share Posted June 2, 2015 This is a false dilemma. You're suggesting that the difference between a large company being in the black or in the red is $1 per hour per minimum wage employee. That certainly isn't the case.Depends on the company. Being 'big' isn't always profitable. Many retail companies have this problem. Sears is closing stores and looks like they are going under. Adding more taxes under false pretense is the main issue in this case. Lastly, supply and demand economics applies to the labor market if you want it to be healthy. Low wage jobs are usually that for a reason. Adding wage controls to the point that it makes no sense for owners to be in business damages the economy. 1dhr sounds minimal but it could add to a negative balance sheet in some cases. like a cat in a sil, I observe life, moving and still. My words give a clue,look inside to see whats true Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Economy 53,160 Posted June 2, 2015 Author Share Posted June 2, 2015 Depends on the company. Being 'big' isn't always profitable. Many retail companies have this problem. Sears is closing stores and looks like they are going under. Adding more taxes under false pretense is the main issue in this case. Lastly, supply and demand economics applies to the labor market if you want it to be healthy. Low wage jobs are usually that for a reason. Adding wage controls to the point that it makes no sense for owners to be in business damages the economy. 1dhr sounds minimal but it could add to a negative balance sheet in some cases. i can say amen to this. I invest a lot in stocks and one of the things we gotta look at it earnings, PEG Multiples and profit of margin... Large companies believe it or not, although in total numbers they may have more profit because they are bigger, as a percentage of revenue, its often lower than that of small companies probably cause they are hit with more regulations and unions etc Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Woolfsmck 2,763 Posted June 2, 2015 Share Posted June 2, 2015 i can say amen to this. I invest a lot in stocks and one of the things we gotta look at it earnings, PEG Multiples and profit of margin... Large companies believe it or not, although in total numbers they may have more profit because they are bigger, as a percentage of revenue, its often lower than that of small companies probably cause they are hit with more regulations and unions etcManagement and logistics costs .. Sometimes it's cooking the books to make their tax liability smaller... Each sector has its own quirks...also competetors ... Auto companies have to fight foreign companies for sales. like a cat in a sil, I observe life, moving and still. My words give a clue,look inside to see whats true Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Economy 53,160 Posted June 2, 2015 Author Share Posted June 2, 2015 Management and logistics costs .. Sometimes it's cooking the books to make their tax liability smaller... Each sector has its own quirks...also competetors ... Auto companies have to fight foreign companies for sales. all i know is i should totally invest in Canadian agriculture companies read my latest topic they saying with over-population getting worse, and droughts from global warming... Canada with so much free land, tones of water for irrigation and longer growing seasosn from warming climate should consider making an economy off growing food instead of oil haha Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Woolfsmck 2,763 Posted June 2, 2015 Share Posted June 2, 2015 all i know is i should totally invest in Canadian agriculture companies read my latest topic they saying with over-population getting worse, and droughts from global warming... Canada with so much free land, tones of water for irrigation and longer growing seasosn from warming climate should consider making an economy off growing food instead of oil hahaToo bad you can't sell skitoes becaus Saskatoon has a mess of em like a cat in a sil, I observe life, moving and still. My words give a clue,look inside to see whats true Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Economy 53,160 Posted June 2, 2015 Author Share Posted June 2, 2015 Too bad you can't sell skitoes becaus Saskatoon has a mess of em that irrelevant town in that irrelevant Province? Actually Saskatchwean now has the lowest unemployment in Canada (below Albertas now), they sell tones of Uranium, potash and of course wheat and grains... So i guess they not that irrelevant.. but irelevant in the sense that theres barely 1 million people living there Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luc 4,776 Posted June 2, 2015 Share Posted June 2, 2015 Agreed. However its not helping. Its a tax on business and makes low skilled people 10% more expensive to hire even tho they arent getting anything else out of it at the very least if u need more revenue raise over-all taxes very slightly... Dont raise it on the hiring itself thats such a terrible idea Raising taxes would have the same result: making the cost for hiring somebody higher. Better might be to raise taxes on fossil fuel use. Double the price of gas, electricity and oil and build trams, trains and cycling roads and raise fines on companies polluting the air (in turn reduces healthcare spending) and spend more on anti-overweight programs. Raise taxes on the richest by a little bit Or do it a different way and make the government as efficient as possible, less rules, less regulations, less taxes, etc. But I don't think that's a way you'd want to go, if you want to be good to your citizens and not just your businesses. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Economy 53,160 Posted June 2, 2015 Author Share Posted June 2, 2015 Raising taxes would have the same result: making the cost for hiring somebody higher. Better might be to raise taxes on fossil fuel use. Double the price of gas, electricity and oil and build trams, trains and cycling roads and raise fines on companies polluting the air (in turn reduces healthcare spending) and spend more on anti-overweight programs. Raise taxes on the richest by a little bit Or do it a different way and make the government as efficient as possible, less rules, less regulations, less taxes, etc. But I don't think that's a way you'd want to go, if you want to be good to your citizens and not just your businesses. Not really... Not the same thing. This is a tax on hiring directly, a small tax hike is on everything reducing labor and trying get more done with fewer employees wouldnt lower ur tax if it was a general tax hike. But if ur taxing labor directly... Now with this dumb fee Instead of hiring 10 people you might hire just 9 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luc 4,776 Posted June 2, 2015 Share Posted June 2, 2015 Not really... Not the same thing. This is a tax on hiring directly, a small tax hike is on everything reducing labor and trying get more done with fewer employees wouldnt lower ur tax if it was a general tax hike. But if ur taxing labor directly... Now with this dumb fee Instead of hiring 10 people you might hire just 9 What do you mean with 'a general tax hike'? A hike on all taxes? Or just income taxes? VAT? Corporate taxes? :huh: Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Economy 53,160 Posted June 2, 2015 Author Share Posted June 2, 2015 What do you mean with 'a general tax hike'? A hike on all taxes? Or just income taxes? VAT? Corporate taxes? :huh: what i was saying, was that if raising revenue from businesses was their goal, they might as well raise Corporate or general business taxes by 0.5% or something... This type of tax, is a tax specifically on hiring... so companies are only gonna be encouraged to keep operations with as few people as possible Even if companies dont hire less cause of this, still, unless your making JUST UNDER $15/h your not likely to get a raise, so back to my original point this will do nothing for most low payed workers and is just a smoke screen for its true intentions (raising taxes on businesses) cause as i said, if the real intention was to raise wages on low payed workers, might as well raise minimum wage as that way at least they would be garanteed the higher pay Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
.thumb.jpg.99c40bc2a10ded8236a48b4fe15c6be8.jpg)
Featured Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.