• 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!

'Company Policy: We are not hiring until Obama is gone'

MrVicchio said:
Did anyone slamming the man read his reasons for not hiring? It's not political based, it's business based. He believes the business climate sucks, that it's too expensive to hire with unknown higher costs in the forms of healthcare, regulation and taxes coming down the way,a nd he doesn't believe that Obama gives a **** about the plight of businesses in this country.

So he takes a stand. To call him an idiot without commenting on his reasoning is well, indisputably partisan commentary.
Click to expand...

Maybe he should put up a sign saying he misses Bush. Oh, wait....
 
CriticalThought said:
The funny part is if people like his position and want to do more business with him, then he just screwed himself over because now he can't expand.
Click to expand...


Oh see, this is where you libs take forefathers like Allenski to the extreme. You think just because he makes a statement that he would have to fore go business that would benefit him because all of the sudden he can't hire anyone.....hahahaha...Too funny.

j-mac
 
apdst said:
He doesn't have to much worry about on that score. :rofl
Click to expand...

:roll:
The idea that you or anyone else can predict what the political environment will be like a year from now is absurd. At this point, the range of possible election outcomes is anything from an Obama landslide to a Republican landslide.

apdst said:
Actually, someone with any business savvy would look at the political climate, before expanding their business.
Click to expand...

"The political climate" is not the same as "the name of the president." The president is not a king who automatically gets his way on anything he wants. There are 535 congresspeople as well. Furthermore, for most types of businesses, the difference between a Republican-dominated government and a Democratic-dominated government isn't very big.
 
Last edited:
I don't think the government should arrange its policies on the basis that some people are bad businessmen. The free market will take care of that problem.
 
He's just coming out and saying what many business owners are already doing. I don't want to work for this man, so I find him extremely irrelevant. If a Republican wins in 2012 I'm walking off my job on inauguration day. How's that for advance notice?
 
Kandahar said:
:roll:
The idea that you or anyone else can predict what the political environment will be like a year from now is absurd. At this point, the range of possible election outcomes is anything from an Obama landslide to a Republican landslide.
Click to expand...

Its done all the time. Hell part of the whole of Wall Street is about predicting the political environment.

Kandahar said:
"The political climate" is not the same as "the name of the president." The president is not a king who automatically gets his way on anything he wants. There are 535 congresspeople as well. Furthermore, for most types of businesses, the difference between a Republican-dominated government and a Democratic-dominated government isn't very big.
Click to expand...

But it is the President that can, through leadership, guide the way things go. Or has all the talking, cajoling, wheedling, threats, diplomacy that has been issued by Presidents towards the Congress and Senate done by pretty much every single President in US history just wasted breath?
 
Mickey Shane said:
He's just coming out and saying what many business owners are already doing. I don't want to work for this man, so I find him extremely irrelevant. If a Republican wins in 2012 I'm walking off my job on inauguration day. How's that for advance notice?
Click to expand...

Do you work in the white house? Just kidding.
 
Kal'Stang said:
Its done all the time.
Click to expand...

That doesn't mean it's done accurately.

Hell part of the whole of Wall Street is about predicting the political environment.
Click to expand...

And very few people on Wall Street can beat the market anyway. I wouldn't put too much faith in their predictive powers. A year before the election, the best we can do is try to estimate the probabilities of the outcome of the election. On InTrade, the probability of either party winning the White House next November is currently trading at about 50%. That seems reasonable to me; a year before the election you'd do just as well flipping a coin. The idea that anyone can be so sure that they know what will happen in the next election which is a year away is ridiculous (especially when even the PRESENT numbers don't agree with their prediction).

But it is the President that can, through leadership, guide the way things go. Or has all the talking, cajoling, wheedling, threats, diplomacy that has been issued by Presidents towards the Congress and Senate done by pretty much every single President in US history just wasted breath?
Click to expand...

Yeah, it's mostly wasted breath. Actually it probably serves to polarize both the electorate and the Congress. That may occasionally work if the president's party has a huge majority in Congress or if the president is extremely popular...but usually that isn't the case. As Matt Yglesias recently put it, "If there’s an issue you’d like to see progress on, your best hope by far is for two relatively obscure members of congress from opposite sides to reach an agreement, then persuade a bunch of their colleagues, and then unveil the proposal as a big bipartisan initiative." So yes, that presidential talking, cajoling, wheedling, threats, and diplomacy is mostly wasted breath. The president's only real power over legislation is the threat to veto it.

Why Presidential Leadership Doesn't Work Very Well | ThinkProgress
 
The sad thing about it is that many businesses, mine included, have to take steps to limit the negative impact some new legislation has on their businesses. I am not at the point where I'm stopping all hiring, but I can tell you that with the pending, progressive implementation of Obamacare, I am now limiting workers to 30 hours- possibly with the plan to cut hours more to keep below the 50 full time (or FTE) employee limit where we would begin to be required to offer health insurance. Our industry is not conducive to offering health insurance to workers, and we will be unable to do so.... so the choice we have to make is to go ahead and reduce the allowable hours.

These types of decisions are made everyday, and generally hurt the very people they were intended to help.
 
Last edited:
lpast said:
A west Georgia business owner is stirring up controversy with signs he posted on his company's trucks, for all to see as the trucks roll up and down roads, highways and interstates:
"New Company Policy: We are not hiring until Obama is gone."


Looman's company is U.S. Cranes, LLC. He said he put up the signs, and first posted pictures of the signs on his personal Facebook page, six months ago, and he said he received mostly positive reaction from people, "about 20-to-one positive."

But for some reason, one of the photos went viral on the Internet on Monday.
And the reaction has been so intense, pro and con, he's had to have his phones disconnected because of the non-stop calls, and he's had to temporarily shut down his company's website because of all the traffic crashing the system.


'Company Policy: We are not hiring until Obama is gone' | 11alive.com
Click to expand...

He's free to do as he wants. Of course if people stop doing business with him because of the policy and he ends up losing his company...well that's a consequence of freedom as well. I doubt that would happen though, and I don't really give a **** one way or the other. Him not hiring people won't help or hinder the economy greatly.
 
Objective Voice said:
There's a difference between not hiring because it's just not in your budget to do so, and not hiring because you don't like who is the President of the United State.

Huge difference! And any businessman who'd use the President as a metrix to guage his hiring practises need not be in business.

This man's an idiot! Plain and simple.
Click to expand...


That was the whole point of posting this thread, along with I believe theres alot bigger fish doing the same thing for the same reason...
 
It is the legislation of this president that presents a marked, real hardship for small businesses. Not the president himself. His was not a political statement as much as it was a business statement. It is his belief that the president's legislative agenda is causing harm to his business. And he's probably right.
 
mike2810 said:
To early to tell if it was a poor decision. I will agree with that it is his business and he can do what he wants. Don't live in his area or have a need for his type of services. If I did, would most likely give him some business.
Click to expand...

I don't really believe him. He's trying to stir things up, but he would not hurt his business just to make a statement, unless he really is an idiot. If he isn't hiring, it's likely because there isn't a demand.
 
Helix said:
interesting.

Ranking of economies - Doing Business - World Bank Group

Ease of Doing Business Index - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

we're number four worldwide.
Click to expand...

My original argument was that this president's legistative agenda has made business dealings more difficult in THIS country over the last three years. Of course the US is better, in almost every way, than almost any other country. The comparative graph should show the ease of doing business in this country over a period of years in order to make a valid counter argument. How the US compares to other countries in the world has no bearing on whether or not the ease in this country has lessened since Obama took office.

Obama Care: a Sweeping Impact on Part Time Employers - MFRTech

This article is just a sample of the nightmares businesses like mine are facing right now. We exclusively utilize temporary/part time staff because our patients are over 65. They die. We can make no guarantee of hours or income to workers due to situations beyond our control. To have to provide them with health care benefits or risk a per person penalty would destroy my company.
 
I would be interesting in seeing how long it is before he does hire someone, assuming Obama is not reelected. I would bet that it would still be a good long while before he does. People can continue to put the blame on one person, if that what makes them feel better. Our countries problems run much deeper than that.
 
kamikaze483 said:
My original argument was that this president's legistative agenda has made business dealings more difficult in THIS country over the last three years. Of course the US is better, in almost every way, than almost any other country. The comparative graph should show the ease of doing business in this country over a period of years in order to make a valid counter argument. How the US compares to other countries in the world has no bearing on whether or not the ease in this country has lessened since Obama took office.

Obama Care: a Sweeping Impact on Part Time Employers - MFRTech

This article is just a sample of the nightmares businesses like mine are facing right now. We exclusively utilize temporary/part time staff because our patients are over 65. They die. We can make no guarantee of hours or income to workers due to situations beyond our control. To have to provide them with health care benefits or risk a per person penalty would destroy my company.
Click to expand...

health insurance shouldn't be employer-specific. this is a major disadvantage to an American business. health insurance must be untied from employment, and there should also be a public option at the very least. ideally, we will move towards a single-payer system which will have more weight with which to negotiate price. additionally, we should be addressing the shortage of health care workers and the high cost of bringing a drug to market.

the current system is incredibly inefficient and unsustainable.
 
This isn't the thread for it, but I would love to discuss why you consider the current system inefficient.
 
MrVicchio said:
Did anyone slamming the man read his reasons for not hiring? It's not political based, it's business based. He believes the business climate sucks, that it's too expensive to hire with unknown higher costs in the forms of healthcare, regulation and taxes coming down the way,a nd he doesn't believe that Obama gives a **** about the plight of businesses in this country.

So he takes a stand. To call him an idiot without commenting on his reasoning is well, indisputably partisan commentary.
Click to expand...


i was wondering if anybody else understood his reasoning............besides, based on the way that many people feel about O now days, it might just be a great marketing tool for his business
 
fishinRod said:
i was wondering if anybody else understood his reasoning............besides, based on the way that many people feel about O now days, it might just be a great marketing tool for his business
Click to expand...

I don't see how alienating a large chunk of Americans is a good marketing tool.
 
fishinRod said:
i was wondering if anybody else understood his reasoning............besides, based on the way that many people feel about O now days, it might just be a great marketing tool for his business
Click to expand...

That's a double edged sword, though.

One of my best customers still thinks Obama is really The Messiah.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom