Passing the Cost to the Consumer from a Business Owner's Perspective

originally posted by: iosolomon
And where can they really go? What choice do they really have?

To another restaurant if they wanted to stay in the industry and there are plenty of options in that regard.

But it isn't just your workers, it is the other 3.5 billion People in this world, who, without their slave labor, your business would not be possible.

Sorry, I did not have interaction with the majority of the remaining 3.5 billion people in the world, nor were they the responsibility of me or my business. My employees and customers were my concern and based on how we did I think they appreciated the attention.

If that was so, why are they working for you?

In the case of my restaurants it was that they were very busy and afforded them a chance to earn a living and learn the industry.

But you did not understand one of the recurring themes of my posts in this thread. What can We the People do to make your life easier?

You the People can make the government smaller so You the People can keep your hands out of everyone else's pockets.

What can We the People do to make it so that you won't feel justified in silently and legally robbing us?

You make it sound like I stood outside with a shotgun and forced people to eat at my establishment. They lined up and e reservation book was typically full. They willingly payed to dine there.

In regards to saving the money, one of the solutions would be a system like Benjamin Franklin's bequeath to the City of Philadelphia. Small businesses were able to take-out a risk-free loan, and repay it back only if they made money. This worked for 200 years (and it would have lasted longer, except Benjamin Franklin requested it terminate after 200 years).

I looked it up, it was and is a bureaucratic snafu where everyone wanted to use it for their pet projects and not to fund loans for artificers as Franklin bequeathed.

Most People in America want to work. They just don't want to do menial work for jack squat. If society could share the wealth and resources instead of a handful of people hogging them, and a bunch of others (like yourself) justifying this greed, then, maybe then, we can truly build a better tomorrow where AugustusMasonicus would actually feel bad for legally robbing We the People.

Sorry I do not live in a Smurf village like you where making a profit is bad. I do not feel an ounce of regret for how I did in my businesses nor should I.

Augustus felt that he was unwarrantably entitled to a better quality of life. Augustus was an adherent to Plato's Noble Lie, which you, too, are also.

Did he tell you that when you were Julius or Jesus?

The Constitution has EVERYTHING to do with Americans. Since you are an American, or live in America, you are BOUND by the Constitution. I guess they didn't each you that...

Good,so then maybe you can explain how the Constitution has anything to do with the topic.

How can the costs be prevented from being passed onto the end consumer? Simple. A wealth cap or maximum wage. Then, when the owner is placed with the dilemma of raising costs or giving back to society, this dilemma never arises because the owner cannot make more than a prescribed amount.

Your infantile solution does not address escalating costs or maintenance requirements, it presupposes a place where there is a static economy devoid of inflation. Or translated into simpler terms; fantasy.

And how is the government telling you how to manage your profits "news to you"? Every aspect of your business is regulated and monitored by the government.

It never told me how to manage my profits, my profits were managed based on personal requirements and necessities.

a reply to: Greven

You presume wrongly. At best, the business would expand and hire additional workers.

No, in that case there would be a shortage of labor and employers would need to bid for employees.

Businesses hire and pay at or near the minimums; as little as they can get away with without it affecting their profits.

If that were true no one would be paid more than minimum wage.

originally posted by: Semicollegiate
If that were true no one would be paid more than minimum wage.

The average wage in my town is $8.10/hour. It pretty much is true.

originally posted by: Aazadan

originally posted by: Semicollegiate
If that were true no one would be paid more than minimum wage.

The average wage in my town is $8.10/hour. It pretty much is true.

That sounds anecdotal. Any home owners in your town?

I know that it is a minimal, pre Agenda 21 economy that we live in, though.

originally posted by: Semicollegiate
No, in that case there would be a shortage of labor and employers would need to bid for employees.

If that were true no one would be paid more than minimum wage.

We have unemployment now. We also have people who work more than one job. It's possible that there might be a shortage of employees, which would likely raise wages, but not a certainty.

It comes down to bargaining power - how much does an employer need an employee, and how much will that employee settle for working there. If there are lots of potential applicants and few jobs, the employer holds all the cards. Individual employees play the Prisoner's Dilemma against each other. If everybody refused to work for minimum wage, employers wouldn't be able to get away with hiring at minimum wage... but hunger softens resolve.

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

I appreciate the replies, and I hope you do not feel slighted that I will just agree to disagree with you, because if I were to reply, I would be re-hashing the same points I brought up in my first post. (I would, of course, take a different tact with my choice of wording, but you would most likely reply the same.)

Of course, I really don't understand how you fail to realize that the Constitution applies to this thread, but if you haven't gotten it by now, you just won't get it.

However, I will add one final thing:

[Government] never told me how to manage my profits, my profits were managed based on personal requirements and necessities.

Money ("profits") is an illusion.

originally posted by: Greven

originally posted by: Semicollegiate
No, in that case there would be a shortage of labor and employers would need to bid for employees.

If that were true no one would be paid more than minimum wage.

We have unemployment now. We also have people who work more than one job. It's possible that there might be a shortage of employees, which would likely raise wages, but not a certainty.

It comes down to bargaining power - how much does an employer need an employee, and how much will that employee settle for working there. If there are lots of potential applicants and few jobs, the employer holds all the cards. Individual employees play the Prisoner's Dilemma against each other. If everybody refused to work for minimum wage, employers wouldn't be able to get away with hiring at minimum wage... but hunger softens resolve.

This is why contract law is not sufficient to handle dealings between individuals and corporations and the constitution needs to be expanded to cover it. Contracts only work when bargaining power is somewhat equal. When one side has all the power a contract isn't fair, and one side is essentially signing it under duress.

originally posted by: Semicollegiate
That sounds anecdotal. Any home owners in your town?

I know that it is a minimal, pre Agenda 21 economy that we live in, though.

Anecdotal sure, but saying you can work your way out of minimum wage is equally anecdotal. Some people do it, but the reality is different for many of us. There are a few home owners in my town which you'll find anywhere. Someone is always going to be in real estate and be in a position to own/rent homes. When an average wage is low there are also going to be a few at the top with a lot of money.

I'll say this much, unless I somehow land the right job which is really just a matter of winning a type of lottery I will never own a home in my lifetime, or be able to retire (escaping this largely involves being able to go elsewhere for opportunity others claim exists), or get a vacation. The economic system for that to happen to me simply isn't there. It's not that I'm unskilled either, I'm a hard worker and have multiple tech related college degrees... that still doesn't get me more than a minimum wage job, just like every job I have worked in my life.

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus
Appreciate your thoughts and insights. Excellent OP and thread contributions.
Please excuse this insertion. I've read through most of the thread...and wanted to contribute...

A lot of wishful thinking in this thread…
Yeah – “You should eat the costs, and let ME reap the rewards (no inflation)… I don’t care about math or economics…just...let me have things the way I want them.” [/sarcasm]
That’s about as intelligent as the opposing arguments seem to go.

I worked for years developing my craft & product.
At one point, an ‘employer’ said – “Hey – you’re good”…and…promoted me to a lot more responsibility, but with little improvement in compensation.
At the time, I was simply happy to have work when so many others did not…and…worked my A** off to keep the employer’s clients satisfied. This LITERALLY meant that…in order to continue giving the product that had ‘pleased’ the clients previously…I had to do the work of 4 out of 5 that had been added to the team…
Then…more…
After many months of this, with the responsibilities increasing almost exponentially (going from 5 to 75 in six months, and in the process of increasing to 150 subordinates)…and little-more reward for my efforts…I resigned.
My work/product had impressed many…and – they (those that had been impressed) offered me contracts.
I put up the money to start a business (a requirement to accept/service said contracts), then…had to find others to deliver the product & service the contracts.
Everyone I considered hiring (to deliver the product I had developed…which was, likewise, the product I was contracted to provide) that had been ‘in the business’ (those with experience) said – “You’re crazy! ---- I’m not going to do that! ---- That is WAY too much work…and…You Can’t Make Me Do It…”
So, I hired absolute Trainees…and…trained them… Wrote training materials/manuals (materials & training that had not been provided me, or any of those I’d worked with, through the years), paid them to attend the training sessions… etc …
They were making more money than they’d ever made before…and still…would/could not deliver the product…
So – I had to do what I’d done before…which was --- do the bulk of their work for them.
I was working 12-18 hours a day…7 days a week…and still always slightly behind the expectations of the clients.
All those that worked ‘for me’ were making bank… until …I had a heart attack.
Within two weeks of the heart attack, I was back at it…because I saw that we were not going to be able to service the contracts…if I did not.
When that contract was up…I continued to pay these ‘trainees’ for three months…in hopes that they would recognize that I cared for them, and was willing to lose money, just to keep them going.
They (with the exception of 2…out of 15) made no adjustment/s to their work ethic/s, and…finally – with the physical issues and…no hope of developing a group of ‘employees’ that cared enough to WORK to maintain the standard of living I had given them the opportunity to attain…I shut the business down.
I could take the blame for all of it…
Or – I could be honest, and admit that there is a “The World Owes Me” sentiment that is so prevalent in our society that – I see no hope for the future of free enterprise in the U.S.A.

Like so many others… I wish Everyone could live, and live comfortably on their salaries/incomes…But – I am, admittedly…TIRED…of being the one that earns their income/s for them…
I live no better than they (and, in many cases, I live at a much lower ‘standard’) – and they don’t even acknowledge that it was my work that kept them ‘working’ and getting ‘paychecks’…
This isn’t even a tirade.
This isn’t even Socialism… It’s an ‘I DESERVE’ capitalistic society.
Who’s to blame?
Who Cares?

originally posted by: Aazadan

originally posted by: Semicollegiate
If that were true no one would be paid more than minimum wage.

The average wage in my town is $8.10/hour. It pretty much is true.

Looks like it is time to move to a more successful town.

originally posted by: iosolomon

The reality is that government does tell you how to manage your profits, and in America, we have a "government of the People, by the People, for the People." When society fails to properly allocate its resources, then I will tell you how to manage your profits. Because, at the end of the day, in case if you missed it in your American education, profits come from We the People. Therefore, you cannot escape accountability to We the People. (If you don't like it, then go live in Roman Italy...)

.....
Simple. The owner is still able to maintain a decent level of quality while allowing the profits (which, correctly belong to We the People) to flow back to We the People.

Wow I go on vacation to Florida with the Profits of my business and look what I come home too!!!!

You "allow me" to have profits?!?! ....oh Thank You, Thank You masta !!! Good luck getting my profits from me, buddy. What a bunch of horse hooey to quote Col. Potter from MASH.

You see the only tools that Government has are regulations, taxation and inflation that affect my business and potentially my profit. All of them are things that "You the People" end up paying, not me. I will still make my profit. I know you think that I shouldn't be allowed to do that, but I will and you will pay it, as long as my product/service is something you desire at the price I offer it at. If it got so bad that "You the People" wanted to take my profits, then I would pack up my ball and go play elsewhere, which I might add is what Big Business has already done to a great extent. Talk about a self fulfilling prophecy. Good luck getting my service/product for a better value than I offered it to you.......Idiots.

I employ dozens of people, give away around $70,000 per year in charity and make a very good living for me and my family and close associates. I don't feel one little bit bad about any of that. If you want to put in the sweat equity learning how to do likewise, I will gladly show you......for a fee. There's that damm Capitalist Pig in me again.

It's Bizzaro World when someone claims the American Dream is people who don't have enough, wanting to take it from me and those that do rather than go out and earn it like every other successful person does. What is wrong with you?

Being Wealthy is not evil. Being Greedy and Mean to others is. I would contend that you are greedy for what others already have and would rather steal it from them rather than earn it.

Excuse me, I need to start getting ready for another Vacation.........Am I allowed to take another one? Just checking with my "masters" to see if I am spending my profit acceptably.

originally posted by: ArtemisE
a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

I work for a small buisness owner and I know he pays taxes. According to him a lot. He could be playing it up of course. I've never seen his tax info. It really would be crappy to pay min wage while you don't pay taxes. That definitely means your dumping your employees on tax payers and your not even paying your part.

ArtemisE,

Most business owners pay taxes and LOT of it. We pay lots of various costs that are necessary to legally stay in business. We, speaking as small business owners, pay MORE than our fair share of taxes, we just won't pay additional fees and taxes above and beyond what we already do, that's where the passing the costs on point of this thread comes from. If I didn't make a profit, which many on this thread seem to advocate, I would still pay QUITE a bit in various taxes other than income tax, probably more than you pay in Income tax yourself. I pay taxes on my profit, I do so willingly. As I tell my clients, if you aren't paying any income taxes, then you really aren't making real money. I just refuse to be told that "You are not paying your fair share" by people who pay substantially less percentage and dollar-wise when it comes to taxes.

So ArtemisE, when the Government mandates an extra cost to keep doing business, I will pass that along to the end consumer. It will be up to you to decide if you are willing to pay the higher price, it's a chance I am willing to take. You can decide to use my service/product or not. That's how the marketplace works. I assure you, I will price my product/service to make me a decent profit or I will stop providing that product/service.

originally posted by: iosolomon
Of course, I really don't understand how you fail to realize that the Constitution applies to this thread, but if you haven't gotten it by now, you just won't get it.

The title of the thread is self explanatory and no where in the Constitution is it enumerated about how businesses should handle their increasing costs.

Money ("profits") is an illusion.

Funny since an illusion helped pay for my home.

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

What was your overall opinion of the restaurant business and do you think it was easier or harder to run than your retail business? My father is in the restaurant business and I had multiple jobs working for the same franchise all through high school and college, I think It's a cutthroat industry and a huge risk (even if the money can be good). I find it scary that there are so many people who are shocked that things like Obamacare, raising taxes, new energy regulations, higher tax on gasoline, and excess regulations make the price go up. I don't think enough people realize the risk, the amount of money it cost to keep a business running, the amount of businesses who fail in the first few years, the amount of time people have to put in, the amount of people counting on a business owner, and the amount of idiots they have to deal with.

originally posted by: nancyliedersdeaddog
a reply to: [post=17909575]
What was your overall opinion of the restaurant business and do you think it was easier or harder to run than your retail business? My father is in the restaurant business and I had multiple jobs working for the same franchise all through high school and college, I think It's a cutthroat industry and a huge risk (even if the money can be good).

Sorry for such a late response, I just saw your post.

I found them to be very similar, they both required long hours and weekends among with the necessity of having to know all of the jobs in the establishment. I did not find the restaurant business to be cut throat, we had our niche and filled it well which meant it was harder for competition to establish itself but if it did it forced us to maintain our consistency and look for additional ways to separate ourselves from them.

I find it scary that there are so many people who are shocked that things like Obamacare, raising taxes, new energy regulations, higher tax on gasoline, and excess regulations make the price go up. I don't think enough people realize the risk, the amount of money it cost to keep a business running, the amount of businesses who fail in the first few years, the amount of time people have to put in, the amount of people counting on a business owner, and the amount of idiots they have to deal with.

The fact that many people do not understand basic business operations or economic fundamentals is what really troubles me.

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

No problem if you don't mind me asking what kind of Food did your restaurant serve and did you ever consider getting back into business or opening a 2nd restaurant (when you were still in the restaurant business)?

a reply to: nancyliedersdeaddog

One was Italian and the other was Italian/Continental. We opened the second one while we had the first.

I would not get back in at this point but would think about doing either a B&B in Cape May or a restaurant there if I had a responsible partner or manager.

So when some companies use tax loopholes to limited greatly the amount they have to pay in taxes, that's not for all intensive reasons illegal/wrong?

Taxes on profits -after- all the stuff mentioned in the OP is factored in is another thing. A company could be ran and function the same whether it has a moderate profit or an obscene profit. The amount paid to workers, utilities, rent, ect, are obviously squeezed to the fullest amount possible for that company, but whether they make 5 times all that amount, or 500 times that amount in profit, it still wouldn't affect those base levels costs. And the profit could be taxed 50%, whether it be 5 or 500 times the amount of those costs, and it doesn't affect consumers, but it affects the business owner and their pocketbooks. If a business owner's annual income goes from seven figures to six, that will affect consumers, eh. If that were to be tried, they'd only be stabbing the source for their income.

That's how the rich get richer and poor get poorer. The poor being/getting poorer is a matter of efficiency for the business owners, and since you could say they're smart and in control, that's what's going to happen. It'd be a failure if that wasn't the case. The rich, their money, balloons, and the power and influence they have is used to leverage for more of the same. They subjugate those that aren't themselves.

originally posted by: Turq1

So when some companies use tax loopholes to limited greatly the amount they have to pay in taxes, that's not for all intensive reasons illegal/wrong?

Why would that be illegal? Private citizens can also take advantage of tax loopholes on their own filings.

Taxes on profits -after- all the stuff mentioned in the OP is factored in is another thing. A company could be ran and function the same whether it has a moderate profit or an obscene profit. The amount paid to workers, utilities, rent, ect, are obviously squeezed to the fullest amount possible for that company, but whether they make 5 times all that amount, or 500 times that amount in profit, it still wouldn't affect those base levels costs. And the profit could be taxed 50%, whether it be 5 or 500 times the amount of those costs, and it doesn't affect consumers, but it affects the business owner and their pocketbooks. If a business owner's annual income goes from seven figures to six, that will affect consumers, eh. If that were to be tried, they'd only be stabbing the source for their income.

This was discussed at length. Not all earning periods are boons. Investing some of your earnings to prepare for an off-earnings period is reasonable and prudent.

That's how the rich get richer and poor get poorer. The poor being/getting poorer is a matter of efficiency for the business owners, and since you could say they're smart and in control, that's what's going to happen. It'd be a failure if that wasn't the case. The rich, their money, balloons, and the power and influence they have is used to leverage for more of the same. They subjugate those that aren't themselves.

Not sure where you are going with this, I did not get into business to come out with less than I started so what is your point?