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

page: 15
46
<< 12  13  14    16  17 >>

log in

join

posted on May, 19 2014 @ 03:34 PM
link   

originally posted by: macman
I still don't see the allure that people have to "taxing" one business over another.


Same here. It all ends up coming from the same revenue source, the end user.

Do people truly not see that the reason for $3.75 a gallon gas has so much to do with the oil company being taxed, the service station being taxed and then the consumer being taxed on top of those others taxes???


Actually, to be totally accurate, it is the consumer paying the corporate, Federal and State taxes on a gallon of gasoline.




posted on May, 19 2014 @ 04:51 PM
link   
And this thread and a few of the comments is enough said on why capitalism is a failed system. I can appreciate a small business owner's desire to make money; however, if costs are passed on to a consumer, it all depends on what quality of lifestyle that business owner is at. For example, Wal Mart (although not a small business) should pay its employees $20 an hour, and the shareholders, CEO, and others should pay for that out of their own overbloated salaries. The same should apply to small business owners.

But, on the flip side, small business owners justify passing this cost by saying "it's not easy work." Well, why isn't it easy work? Jobs should not be so difficult that you need to justify making six figures from while your lowest paid employee is barely making 30 grand.

Good ole' capitalism. Greed wins.



posted on May, 19 2014 @ 05:05 PM
link   

originally posted by: iosolomon
The same should apply to small business owners.


Why? I did not get into business and risk my own capital to have you tell me how to manage my profits.

But, on the flip side, small business owners justify passing this cost by saying "it's not easy work." Well, why isn't it easy work? Jobs should not be so difficult that you need to justify making six figures from while your lowest paid employee is barely making 30 grand.


There is no justification required. That is how it works, costs go up, the end user pays it. This applies to all economic systems, not just capitalism, so spare us your personal disdain and try looking at the real world.



posted on May, 19 2014 @ 05:39 PM
link   
a reply to: AugustusMasonicus



Why? I did not get into business and risk my own capital to have you tell me how to manage my profits.


But you are okay with the government telling you how to manage your own profits? Come on, buddy, get off your high horse.



There is no justification required. That is how it works, costs go up, the end user pays it. This applies to all economic systems, not just capitalism, so spare us your personal disdain and try looking at the real world.


Hmm. I guess you haven't taken a basic anthropology course to learn about how the economies of tribal systems worked. So, like I said, you really should get off your high horse.

You missed my point. Greed wins. Your statements are indicative of a very greedy individual.



try looking at the real world


I think you should re-read my post. It is you that needs to look at the real world.

More than half of the world, and I repeat, more than half of the world, are unable to provide for themselves or their families, going hungry each night. This is a problem. Do you disagree? Of course you do, you got a "business" to run, and a capitalistic master to serve.



That is how it works, costs go up, the end user pays it.


If the owner of a business is making more than his or her customers, then there is a problem.

Again, capitalism = greed. Stop fooling yourself, and please, step off of your high horse. But that might be asking too much of someone who uses a picture of Augustus as their avatar...



posted on May, 19 2014 @ 05:55 PM
link   

originally posted by: iosolomon
But you are okay with the government telling you how to manage your own profits? Come on, buddy, get off your high horse.


And where did I say that?

Hmm. I guess you haven't taken a basic anthropology course to learn about how the economies of tribal systems worked. So, like I said, you really should get off your high horse.


Tribal economics? Seriously? I think you are a few millennia behind the times. Get with the program.

You missed my point. Greed wins. Your statements are indicative of a very greedy individual.


No, just someone who knew how to run successful businesses, something obviously well beyond your comprehension or abilities to do.

I think you should re-read my post. It is you that needs to look at the real world.


I am fully in the real world where tribal economics is not something people practice.

More than half of the world, and I repeat, more than half of the world, are unable to provide for themselves or their families, going hungry each night. This is a problem. Do you disagree? Of course you do, you got a "business" to run, and a capitalistic master to serve.


And? What does this have to do with the thread? How is this even remotely relevant to governments dumping more and more hidden taxes on consumers?

If the owner of a business is making more than his or her customers, then there is a problem.


Based on what findings? Your personal opinion?

Again, capitalism = greed. Stop fooling yourself, and please, step off of your high horse. But that might be asking too much of someone who uses a picture of Augustus as their avatar...


Who cares about my avatar? Is that the best you can do? Insult people's avatars and call them 'greedy'?

Again, capitalism has nothing to do with end users paying more, every economic system (at least those that do not involve people living in mud huts) will cause the same situation when costs go up.



posted on May, 19 2014 @ 06:18 PM
link   

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

AugustusMasonicus said, "Why? I did not get into business and risk my own capital to have you tell me how to manage my profits."

iosolomon replied, "But you are okay with the government telling you how to manage your own profits? Come on, buddy, get off your high horse."

AugustusMasonicus retorted, "And where did I say that?"


I don't understand why you are asking me this question. I also live in this world, and I have a right to say how it should be run. You either should have addressed the substance of my argument, which was that you do not have a problem with the government telling you how to manage your profits, or should not have said anything.

I am trying to have a colorful discussion with you, but the rest of your post shows that you resort to fallacious reasoning and fancy evasions of the point at hand.



Tribal economics? Seriously? I think you are a few millennia behind the times. Get with the program.


Am I a few thousand years behind the times? Or have we devolved as a society? Again, you miss the point I was trying to raise. Instead, you dodge my point like a politician would...like Augustus would...(which is why I brought up the picture, not to insult you on it, but to say that you should raise above a pitiful example of a leader.)



No, just someone who knew how to run successful businesses, something obviously well beyond your comprehension or abilities to do.


The point I was bringing up, "How are you not greedy?" (and, this goes without saying, but you might need the clarification, "How are you not greedy [for passing the costs onto the end users]?" And don't say that's just how the economy works, because I will refer you to economies that do NOT work that way.)



I am fully in the real world where tribal economics is not something people practice.


Again, I am trying to challenge you to question the "real" world that you live in, but you resort to childish retorts.



iosolomon said, "More than half of the world, and I repeat, more than half of the world, are unable to provide for themselves or their families, going hungry each night. This is a problem. Do you disagree? Of course you do, you got a "business" to run, and a capitalistic master to serve.


And? What does this have to do with the thread? How is this even remotely relevant to governments dumping more and more hidden taxes on consumers?


How do not understand how that is related to this thread...? You are only able to run your business and make a profit because of the slave labor that america and europe are currently employing. I then called you a slave to your capitalistic masters (which would include the government).

I apologize for speaking to you as if you were educated. You are the one who said that "running a business is beyond my comprehension," but I guess that a philosophical and reflective dialogue with you is "beyond your comprehension." Hopefully, I have dumbed it down enough for you...


iosolomon said, "If the owner of a business is making more than his or her customers, then there is a problem."

Based on what findings? Your personal opinion?


Based on the definition of greed. Why should you benefit off of someone else's labor? You do not do anything more than demanding than any other person does. And if you make the argument that you do, then I refer you to my point that we should design society so that your job isn't demanding. (Of course, you chose to ignore that point...)

So the point is, you are not entitled to make any more money than anyone else (within reason). The owner of a restaurant? No, that's not a job that deserves increased compensation. Now, if you said you were a doctor, the owner of your own clinic, that would be a different story (and, by doctor, I mean general practitioner or even orthopedic surgeon instead of the scam-artists society calls dermatologists.)


iosolomon said,"But that might be asking too much of someone who uses a picture of Augustus as their avatar..."

Who cares about my avatar? Is that the best you can do? Insult people's avatars and call them 'greedy'?


I don't think I was insulting you for your avatar. I was pointing out that someone who idolizes Augustus is probably as wise as Augustus --as wise as August-- I don't see an insult.

Do you disagree that you are not greedy?



Again, capitalism has nothing to do with end users paying more, every economic system (at least those that do not involve people living in mud huts) will cause the same situation when costs go up.


And why do we live by such economic systems? Why do we live by such a system that your job as a business owner (which benefits off of other people's hard-work) deserves to make so much money for it? What is so demanding about what you do? What can society do to make your job easier?

Since you idolized Augustus, you should be familiar with Plato's Noble Lie. You like this oppressive system of capitalism, because you get to benefit off of other people's hard-work, and not feel "bad" about it, and you keep the lie going. You do not add any function to society that deserves you to make so much money, and you should be heavily taxed for the lack of work that you actually do, and (since you have a tough time following the implicit points I am making), you should NOT be passing this cost onto the end users.

Now, I hope that you will actually say something of substance to me. If you feel the need to continue dodging and evading the very valid points I am bringing up, then you need not reply.



posted on May, 19 2014 @ 06:31 PM
link   
a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

It really all boils down to... Do you consider slum lords , pay day loan places and other pedatory businesses moral? There profitable sure. But are the better for society or a drain on all society. I think businesses that pay adults min wage are just employments form of being a slum lord.


IMHO if you have to pay that to adults for full time work to be profitable. Then you don't have a profitable buisness model in the first place. Your about 2 steps above a sweat shop owner which is about 2 steps over a slave owner.


Profitability shouldn't be the primary goal. First you should make sure your buisness is a benefit to society. Then profit should be your number 2 goal.



posted on May, 19 2014 @ 06:49 PM
link   

originally posted by: iosolomon
I don't understand why you are asking me this question.


Because it is a non sequitur and irrelevant. I do not want anyone, government included, telling me how to manage my profits, it is none of their business.


Am I a few thousand years behind the times? Or have we devolved as a society? Again, you miss the point I was trying to raise. Instead, you dodge my point like a politician would...like Augustus would...(which is why I brought up the picture, not to insult you on it, but to say that you should raise above a pitiful example of a leader.)


There is nothing to dodge, your socio-economic model is not one relevant to the conversation. Tribal societies do not run businesses. Stick to the topic.

The point I was bringing up, "How are you not greedy?" (and, this goes without saying, but you might need the clarification, "How are you not greedy [for passing the costs onto the end users]?" And don't say that's just how the economy works, because I will refer you to economies that do NOT work that way.)


It has nothing to do with greed and everything about ensuring that your business remains open. Give me a viable business model where the business owner does not have to pass escalating costs on to the end users and can fund them internally.

Again, I am trying to challenge you to question the "real" world that you live in, but you resort to childish retorts


Spare me. Too funny coming with the guy who equates people's avatars with their real life personas.

How do not understand how that is related to this thread...? You are only able to run your business and make a profit because of the slave labor that america and europe are currently employing. I then called you a slave to your capitalistic masters (which would include the government).


Slave labor implies no wages, I certainly paid my employees wages.

I apologize for speaking to you as if you were educated. You are the one who said that "running a business is beyond my comprehension," but I guess that a philosophical and reflective dialogue with you is "beyond your comprehension." Hopefully, I have dumbed it down enough for you...


It certainly is beyond your comprehension if you have to cite tribal economics as a viable comparator to the topic. And no need to dumb it down, your initial posts were pretty dumb as is.

Based on the definition of greed. Why should you benefit off of someone else's labor? You do not do anything more than demanding than any other person does. And if you make the argument that you do, then I refer you to my point that we should design society so that your job isn't demanding. (Of course, you chose to ignore that point...)


I benefited from others labor and they benefited from my employing them and compensating them monetarily (and in some cases with product). The topic of the thread is not the employee-employer relationship nor whether my job, or anyone else's who runs a business, is 'demanding'. Neither is it a forum for you to rail against whatever economic system that crawled up your rectum and expired. It is about passing the costs on to the end user when the false dichotomy is that businesses pay taxes and other increase when in actuality it is the end user. Stick to the topic or go troll someone else's thread.

So the point is, you are not entitled to make any more money than anyone else (within reason). The owner of a restaurant? No, that's not a job that deserves increased compensation. Now, if you said you were a doctor, the owner of your own clinic, that would be a different story (and, by doctor, I mean general practitioner or even orthopedic surgeon instead of the scam-artists society calls dermatologists.)


And who is to say? You? Again, based on what determinations? I am, and everyone else who runs a business, entitled to make what I feel is appropriate based on my requirements, not yours.

I don't think I was insulting you for your avatar. I was pointing out that someone who idolizes Augustus is probably as wise as Augustus --as wise as August-- I don't see an insult.


I do not idolize anyone, with the possible exception of my mother who came to this country with nothing and ended up making something of her self.


And why do we live by such economic systems? Why do we live by such a system that your job as a business owner (which benefits off of other people's hard-work) deserves to make so much money for it? What is so demanding about what you do? What can society do to make your job easier?


'Demanding' in so much that I was also an employee of my business and had obligations to prepare people's food. I also had to function as a corporate officer and disburse payroll and deal with vendors. Because of this, as a shareholder, I was entitled to take as much as I deemed fit for my 70+ hour weeks because it was my business. Not yours and not anyone else's.


Since you idolized Augustus...


See above.


...you should be familiar with Plato's Noble Lie. You like this oppressive system of capitalism, because you get to benefit off of other people's hard-work, and not feel "bad" about it, and you keep the lie going. You do not add any function to society that deserves you to make so much money, and you should be heavily taxed for the lack of work that you actually do, and (since you have a tough time following the implicit points I am making), you should NOT be passing this cost onto the end users.


Says you and honestly, your opinion of what I should or should not have been doing is totally irrelevant. And being that the only person having comprehension issues in this thread at this point is yourself maybe you can lock up that Nobel Prize for Economics and explain what business model or viable economic system does not pass costs to the end user but are miraculously absorbed internally. Other than mud hut tribal ones.

Now, I hope that you will actually say something of substance to me. If you feel the need to continue dodging and evading the very valid points I am bringing up, then you need not reply.


What were your points again? Oh yeah:
    You confuse people's avatars with reality
    You confuse tribal economics as a desired way of living by persons other than yourself
    You confuse escalating costs borne by end users as purely capitalistic
    You confuse employees with slavery


Are you seeing the theme here? But I am not so surprised that you are confused with a great many things when you make absurd statements like the one below:


I am the reincarnations of King Solomon, Abraham Lincoln, Julius Caesar, the Prophet Isaiah, the Prophet Daniel, Emperor Hirohito, Emperor Yama (an ancient Chinese Emperor who 20 million Chinese are direct descendants of), a Russian Czar (who killed the doctors for failing to heal), Emperor Kefka (from FFVI, but that was based off an ancient Korean Emperor), Krishna, the "original" Dali Lama, and Jesus Christ.


Stick to your delusion threads and leave the real world functions to people who are not off their rockers.



posted on May, 19 2014 @ 06:54 PM
link   

originally posted by: MrSpad
Coporate profits are their highest in history. Corporate taxes are at their lowest in modern history. During the golden age small buisness the 40 and 50s Coporate taxes were more than double what they are now. Has any of this massive reduction corporate taxes meant a reduction of costs for consumers? Nope. All it has meant is more profits for companies.


This. Large corporations and big businesses have been given insane amounts of tax breaks, bailouts, and welfare benefits from the government. Their taxes have steadily decreased, while their profits have increased by insane margins. So, given that they are raking in so much money, we should see general all around improvements across the board. Yet:

1. Employee wages and salaries have remained stagnant, and have not matched inflation. I am not talking about minimum wage jobs, either. I'm talking About regular jobs that people have worked years in. Company makes more money year after year

2. Sure, big business creates jobs. Too bad the majority of those jobs are being created overseas rather than at home. As much as things are getting ridiculous here at home, I really have no desire to move to China, Vietnam, or Mexico just to find work.

3. Benefits to employees have been getting cut and eliminated, including things like vacation and sick leave.

4. Despite the fact that many companies use cheap foreign produced material for their business, on top of paying employees less than before, prices of their products continue to rise.

I have no problem with businesses making profit, but when a business is turning like 1000% profit after all the overhead is accounted for, yet they continue to squeeze employee and consumer alike for more, without giving more in return, we have a problem. And this is a problem that is overwhelmingly a characteristic of big business.



posted on May, 19 2014 @ 06:54 PM
link   

originally posted by: ArtemisE
It really all boils down to... Do you consider slum lords , pay day loan places and other pedatory businesses moral?


What does morality have to do with this? The costs of business increases are not about morality, they are about reality.


I think businesses that pay adults min wage are just employments form of being a slum lord.


So every adult is entitled to make how much? Even if they are uneducated, unskilled, unmotivated and/or unproductive?

Profitability shouldn't be the primary goal. First you should make sure your buisness is a benefit to society. Then profit should be your number 2 goal.


A 'benefit to society'? I ran two restaurants. I like to go out to eat and have eaten at some top line places but none of them, not one, would be considered a 'benefit to society'. They are by nature a luxury. You do not need to go out to eat as a necessity so I would really like you to lucidly explain how a restaurateur makes their business a benefit to society to fulfill your ridiculous moral prerequisite to being a business owner.



posted on May, 19 2014 @ 08:33 PM
link   
a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

Every adult who works a full time week should be entitled to enough money to pay for the cheapest apt., utilities, transportation to work , food and clothing.

That's not charity. That's common sense. If you get a full work week out of your employees. Stopping them from having other employees. They should be able to afford food, clothing and shelter.
edit on 19-5-2014 by ArtemisE because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 19 2014 @ 08:40 PM
link   
a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

Resteraunts benifit society 100% as long as they pay fair wages. It is a bottom rung job. It should only pay the minimum it takes to support yourself. There employees arnt on welfare then.



posted on May, 20 2014 @ 08:34 AM
link   
a reply to: ArtemisE

"entitled" huh....

No wonder we are screwed.

What else are people "entitled" to?



posted on May, 20 2014 @ 08:50 AM
link   

originally posted by: ArtemisE
Every adult who works a full time week should be entitled to enough money to pay for the cheapest apt., utilities, transportation to work , food and clothing.


You did not answer my question. Are they still 'entitled' even if the are uneducated, untrained, unskilled and/or unproductive?



posted on May, 20 2014 @ 08:53 AM
link   
a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

Yes ... OR civilization is NOT CIVILIZED!



posted on May, 20 2014 @ 08:58 AM
link   

originally posted by: ArtemisE
Resteraunts benifit society 100% as long as they pay fair wages.


Wow, you are all over the place. So as long as a business pays a 'fair wage' they are a 'benefit to society' and can then earn a profit and pass business increases to the end user?


It is a bottom rung job.


Nice. I had waitresses who made $25+ an hour and my chefs made more. They all probably appreciated their 'bottom rung' job more than you ever would.


It should only pay the minimum it takes to support yourself. There employees arnt on welfare then.


None of my employes were on Welfare but that did not mean all of them earned the same or earned more than minimum wage.



posted on May, 20 2014 @ 08:59 AM
link   

originally posted by: DietJoke
a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

Yes ... OR civilization is NOT CIVILIZED!


So 'civilization' is compensating unqualified people according to a perception?



posted on May, 20 2014 @ 09:04 AM
link   

originally posted by: ArtemisE
a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

Every adult who works a full time week should be entitled to enough money to pay for the cheapest apt., utilities, transportation to work , food and clothing.


I can understand that but people blow cash like crazy these days needlessly.

I have lived on 12-10k per year for a family of four, for around a decade.
It's getting tougher because rent skyrocketed here, but I'll just have to figure something out eh?

At the very bottom level, we could just eat rice with a veggie or two, and drink water all day, which would be extremely cheap compared to all of the stuff we buy all of the time. Not the healthiest meal but it will get you through the day, it's worked for millions of people for thousands of years.

The cheapest apartments are 'ghetto' and are about half the price of a decent apartment (such as the one I'm in currently). Utilities are varied but if you are really conservative and pay attention you can cut that bill down significantly.

For transportation in the bigger cities buses or trains are really cheap alternatives, but you will have to walk a bit!

So for perspective:: at the baseline a moderate job can cover 12k+ a year and will get a conservative person through the year financially (not counting the mega IRS return poor folks get every year). A "full time job" would get you way beyond this income level in theory.

The 12k is for my location and other locales I've been at, which are most likely the US Averages for cities. Anything less than that and I can understand them needing some sort of constant assistance.

I'm not saying that there isn't a need and that everything's perfect, but I am saying that the situation is manageable, at least in our current economy.



posted on May, 20 2014 @ 09:15 AM
link   
a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

No. Civilization is taking care of your weak and helpless. A civilization can be judged by how they treat there poor.



posted on May, 20 2014 @ 09:17 AM
link   
a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

No! ... It's according to semantic logic ... civilizations MUST be civilized, which means to care for everyone!

It is about ATTITUDE!





new topics
top topics
 
46
<< 12  13  14    16  17 >>

log in

join