• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Company exec: you are fired if Obama wins!

Loki97 said:
The natural reaction of any organism to a threat to it's existence is to eliminate that threat. You also overlook the inherent human inclination to revenge.
Click to expand...

so why does Obama see business as a threat?
 
haymarket said:
If you gave me a free coupon I would not eat there. And that was before you posted this. Erstaz imitation faux Italian - cannot get much worse than that. Life is too short to eat anything less than very good food especially when you know better.

Okay - back to the topic. ;)
Click to expand...

Don't have a lot of these things in my parts, but decent place with the kids and doesn't break the bank. A place like this is not competing against michelin star restaurants. It fills a niche, and does it well.
 
LowDown said:
I'm sure he started building the house when his company was doing well. What he's saying now is that his company isn't going to do well if Obama is elected, so his house is immaterial. Who could have foreseen that we'd have an administration that is so thoroughly and completely anti-business?
Click to expand...

He's starting to finish the house and brags the marble and elevators are now going in. Of course he accomplished this through a nine month period where he wasn't charged interest on the loans involved in the construction. A benefit few but the affluent would ever be accorded.
 
MaggieD said:
Here ya' go:
Click to expand...

As an aside, and I don't intend to derail the thread, Care2 finally drove me so crazy with their endless e-mails, OMG, that I finally clicked on whatever in several e-mails to stop the incessant onslaught. Mainly, anyway. I can deal with one a day, just not five or more. Lesson learned: Don't send Care2 greeting cards!
 
TurtleDude said:
so why does Obama see business as a threat?
Click to expand...

We aren't talking about business in general. We are discussing a business owner who threatens to fire employees unles they vote the way he wishes. I will say that any business that practices such tactics is a threat to our system of government as it is yet another attempt to return to the company store model.
 
CriticalThought said:
Here is my evidence.

1. We just came out of a Great Recession which means that companies have spent the last 3 years maximizing efficiency without ceding territory.
Click to expand...

What "ceding territory"? In light of relative input costs, every business must determine how much of each input to buy and, even if they do the best they can, whether the potential return on investment in a location is worth it. Any increase in costs changes the calculus.

2. At this point, it is highly probable that any further "reduction" or attempts to further maximize efficiency would just mean ceding territory.
Click to expand...

No, it would mean shifting inputs from FTEs to PTEs, though it also could involve additional consolidation due to input cost increases and continued weak demand.

3. Once territory is ceded, anyone who wants it is free to take it up.
Click to expand...

Not really. Some places generate their own incremntal demand (brand cache and all). I know there have been a few restaurants over the years that I used to go to all the time just because I liked something they made or the ambience and when they closed I didn't go to as many restaurants.

But all of this detracts from common sense. When relative input costs increase, a business will do its best to minimize the impact of the cost increase on its bottom line. If it cannot do a good enough job to justify the continued investment (e.g., the cost of a store refresh), it will close.

In other words, the exec has no bargaining power at this point. It is a Zero Sum Game. His loss will just be some other execs gain.
Click to expand...

Are you arguing against the auto bailout? Cause there, this argument would make sense.
 
Loki97 said:
We aren't talking about business in general. We are discussing a business owner who threatens to fire employees unles they vote the way he wishes. I will say that any business that practices such tactics is a threat to our system of government as it is yet another attempt to return to the company store model.
Click to expand...

He is being totally honest with his employees.
 
haymarket said:
If you gave me a free coupon I would not eat there. And that was before you posted this. Erstaz imitation faux Italian - cannot get much worse than that. Life is too short to eat anything less than very good food especially when you know better.

Okay - back to the topic. ;)
Click to expand...

Apparently you haven't lowered yourself to eat there. Their Pasta fagioli is excellent. As is their Braised Beef and Tortelloni and Sicilian Scampi. Their soup/salad is hard to beat. Excellent Italian dressing and all their soups are very good.

Signed:
A Dago from Chicago's Burbs
 
Loki97 said:
The natural reaction of any organism to a threat to it's existence is to eliminate that threat. You also overlook the inherent human inclination to revenge.
Click to expand...

Which expalins why layoffs are the number one cause of death in the United States, Canada and Spain.
 
Loki97 said:
We aren't talking about business in general. We are discussing a business owner who threatens to fire employees unles they vote the way he wishes. I will say that any business that practices such tactics is a threat to our system of government as it is yet another attempt to return to the company store model.
Click to expand...


sounds like a perfectly reasonable exercise of property rights/freedom. if you vote for a person who is hostile to the interests of your employer you ought to pay the consequences. It would be like a gun store employer voting for an anti gun politician or the foreman in a meat packing factory supporting a candidate endorsed by PETA
 
Navy Pride said:
He is being totally honest with his employees.
Click to expand...

No he isn't. Romney can't assure Obamacare will be repealed and obviously his business is doing well enough he can resume construction of his monument to tastelessness. This is an obvious attempt to harass employees into voting in a way that allows him to pursue further avarice and has nothing to do with the business being viable in today's economy.
 
Loki97 said:
No he isn't. Romney can't assure Obamacare will be repealed and obviously his business is doing well enough he can resume construction of his monument to tastelessness. This is an obvious attempt to harass employees into voting in a way that allows him to pursue further avarice and has nothing to do with the business being viable in today's economy.
Click to expand...


Nothing wrong with that.
 
TurtleDude said:
sounds like a perfectly reasonable exercise of property rights/freedom. if you vote for a person who is hostile to the interests of your employer you ought to pay the consequences. It would be like a gun store employer voting for an anti gun politician or the foreman in a meat packing factory supporting a candidate endorsed by PETA
Click to expand...

So you believe an employee should be open to retaliation from an employer for exercising a constitutional right? Please be clear on this since even slaves weren't required to vote in support of slavery.
 
Loki97 said:
So you believe an employee should be open to retaliation from an employer for exercising a constitutional right? Please be clear on this since even slaves weren't required to vote in support of slavery.
Click to expand...


I'm confused. Is he saying that whoever votes for Romney can stay and whoever votes for Obama must go? Or is he just saying that an Obama victory and implementation of Obamacare would cause him to not view their full-time services as worth it anymore in light of various Obamacare costs?

Cause you're right, the former is a big problem. The second is just real life. But I guess he shouldn't treat his employees like adults and should just lie to them that government policy has no impact on their jobs.
 
Loki97 said:
So you believe an employee should be open to retaliation from an employer for exercising a constitutional right? Please be clear on this since even slaves weren't required to vote in support of slavery.
Click to expand...

Under St Mary's Honor Center vs Hicks 509 US 502 (1993) an employer can fire an employee for a good reason, a bad reason or nor reason at all as long as its not one that violates the law (Title VII). Now I disagree with that last part since I don't believe Title VII is based on proper constitutional authority but it is the law. Firing someone for voting for an anti business idiot is not illegal
 
MaggieD said:
You've reminded me that I just read that Olive Garden is testing two markets with making all of their help part-time to avoid Obamacare. That's the reality.
Click to expand...

You may be right or you may be wrong. It could just be scare tactics by some republicans.

We will only know the answer in a few short months,.:)
 
Loki97 said:
Everything wrong with that. It's why the guillotine was made famous.
Click to expand...

I love when the left suggests the hoi polloi will riot of the wealthy don't kowtow to their demands.such riots would actually mean far less poor
 
CJ 2.0 said:
I'm confused. Is he saying that whoever votes for Romney can stay and whoever votes for Obama must go? Or is he just saying that an Obama victory and implementation of Obamacare would cause him to not view their full-time services as worth it anymore in light of various Obamacare costs?

Cause you're right, the former is a big problem. The second is just real life. But I guess he shouldn't treat his employees like adults and should just lie to them that government policy has no impact on their jobs.
Click to expand...

He is tying his forecast to how his employees vote. Vote for Obama and you'll be voting against your continued employment. Most of the time you would also be expected to show figures that demonstrate how such policies make the business unprofitable. What he is doing is saying if I don't get my way I'll take my ball and go home.
 
TurtleDude said:
Nothing wrong with that.
Click to expand...

Its interesting how you bounce around from victimhood, righteousness and then abusiveness, says a lot about the kind of mind set people like you have.
 
TurtleDude said:
Under St Mary's Honor Center vs Hicks 509 US 502 (1993) an employer can fire an employee for a good reason, a bad reason or nor reason at all as long as its not one that violates the law (Title VII). Now I disagree with that last part since I don't believe Title VII is based on proper constitutional authority but it is the law. Firing someone for voting for an anti business idiot is not illegal
Click to expand...

It may be wrong but it is still a form of depotism. Most business people don't use ethics anymore. They use avarice.:)
 
TurtleDude said:
I love when the left suggests the hoi polloi will riot of the wealthy don't kowtow to their demands.such riots would actually mean far less poor
Click to expand...

And I love when the rich and their lapdogs think that they are immune to history's lessons. Qaddafi had far more ability to protect himself from popular insurrection than the poser aristocrats of the United States and he still ended up in pieces in the street.
 
Loki97 said:
He is tying his forecast to how his employees vote. Vote for Obama and you'll be voting against your continued employment. Most of the time you would also be expected to show figures that demonstrate how such policies make the business unprofitable. What he is doing is saying if I don't get my way I'll take my ball and go home.
Click to expand...

Sort of like pointing out "vote for the other guy and your taxes will go up", which is what Obama and his supporters say to middle class people voting for Romney.

the onlydifference here seems to be the business owner is more likely to be right in his assessment as he has crunched the specific numbers while the Obama crew are just making sh** up.

Or are you saying he should just keep them ignorant about the impact of an Obama victory on his ability to continue to employ them full time?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom