Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Have you ever owned a business? The average cost of All regulation per employee in the United States is $5600 or 33% of an employee making $8.00per hour. Add in taxes and this amount skyrockets. Do your own homework.
http://www.sba.gov/advo/research/rs264tot.pdf (broken link)
Yes I have a small biz now. The average cost has been put off onto small biz by those orgs 'too big to fail' who wrote legislation for themselves to deflect costs away from themselves. You were saying?
Quote:
Originally Posted by shorebaby
Goldman Sachs has been ambushed by the congressional thugs. The politicians are manipulating Morgan Stanley stock prices. See Leek of bogus inquiry. Our government is run by crooks. I much prefer busness people.
Goldman sachs sponsored this wackaloon invention unleashing the hounds of hell upon us from the get go. If this were a material product on the market exploding in your face literally, you'd know who was criminally negligent. When it happens abstractly on global scale, you defend them as if they were a drinking buddy. That's what's wrong with your party. I'm not against legit business, I'm against crooks.
Because politicians demand pay to play. If you want to conduct business in the US you have to grease the pols.
Name the date and time the law went into effect that representation has a dollar price tag attached. Who allowed campaign finance money? Who allowed money influence?
Have you ever owned a business? The average cost of All regulation per employee in the United States is $5600 or 33% of an employee making $8.00per hour. Add in taxes and this amount skyrockets. Do your own homework.
http://www.sba.gov/advo/research/rs264tot.pdf (broken link)
There is an immediate problem with your study that should readily apparent.
It appears that the argument rests on economies of scale, which of course would argue that a large enterprise is able to absorb cost more efficiently than a smaller enterprise. The only problem is, some small enterprises don't even have certain costs such as environmental costs as the study suggests.
What environmental costs due to government regulation does even a large law firm have, or a small bakery, or any number of small businesses that are in fact so small as to escape most government regulations all together?
umm....Goldman Sachs and other strong corporations are not a-political. In fact, they are very political and closely connected to the government.
That's my point. This argument that the GOVT is the PROBLEM presumes we've had any government left representing us for decades. We have a corporatocracy representing us, writing their own laws, owning their own judges, owning SEC and Congress. Even small fish like Madeoff can go in style and buy an air conditioned jail cell. I guess he's working on his memoirs right about now. How can it be that our brand of justice is lenient upon anyone 'abstractly' costing America billions, or even luring us into war costing thousands of lives, but just about crucifies a pot head?
It wouldn't matter which party is in office, because no matter how you roll these loaded dice, it will always come out the exact same way against the will of we the people. The instinct of people to restore regulations isn't 100% wrong, but when it's only being authored by the same lobbyists who got us here to begin with, how are we going to see a different outcome? The instinct of people to switch up the players isn't 100% wrong, but when all the rules of campaign finance are exactly the same, how are we going to see a different outcome?
Yes I have a small biz now. The average cost has been put off onto small biz by those orgs 'too big to fail' who wrote legislation for themselves to deflect costs away from themselves. You were saying?
Goldman sachs sponsored this wackaloon invention unleashing the hounds of hell upon us from the get go. If this were a material product on the market exploding in your face literally, you'd know who was criminally negligent. When it happens abstractly on global scale, you defend them as if they were a drinking buddy. That's what's wrong with your party. I'm not against legit business, I'm against crooks.
More non sense do you even have the slightest understanding of the deal Gs put together and is under scrutiny? If I hear that dope Levin say brokers shouldn't bet against their customers I am gonna scream. Have you ever sold a stock? If the stock you were selling didn't have a market your broker would buy it. He is defacto taking a position against you.
If you are against crooks you should be against politicians.
I'd like to see what evidence you're leaning on regarding the first bolded portion conclusion.
Second bolded statement... American workers have been steadily producing more goods and services while getting steadily paid less to accomplish more. Shouldn't those who produce more get paid more? Moreover;
1. when those who are persistently under compensated because the top absorbs their pay increases (rules of supply & demand being applied equally), how is it their own fault?
2. When it's industry wide trend controlling all of the pricing by deliberately creating scarcity, the price of product increased 30%, this is the fault of whom? Very odd math going on in your argument.
No you shouldn't necesarily get paid more just because you produce more.
Industry cannot deliberatley create scarcity. It is impossible. That's a fact.
And people at the top don't absorb pay increases of others. That is nonsense. If a company pours too much of its resources into one area (this case being exec pay) the company will go out of business. That's a fact.
There is an immediate problem with your study that should readily apparent.
It appears that the argument rests on economies of scale, which of course would argue that a large enterprise is able to absorb cost more efficiently than a smaller enterprise. The only problem is, some small enterprises don't even have certain costs such as environmental costs as the study suggests.
What environmental costs due to government regulation does even a large law firm have, or a small bakery, or any number of small businesses that are in fact so small as to escape most government regulations all together?
I argue that they've cost shifted. Their tax burden is far lighter than all other small biz. They aren't vested in communities, so they can afford to set up shop in ports of convenience. America has been rewarding them through tax structure and shifting the bill to small biz. Walmart does have economy of scale, and weight in shaping legislation that benefits itself. Small biz has exponential handicaps as result.
Name the date and time the law went into effect that representation has a dollar price tag attached. Who allowed campaign finance money? Who allowed money influence?
Oh yes they codified it! Politicians allow campaign finance. Do you think unions don't spend tons of money? Corruption doesn't know party boundries.
America has been rewarding them through tax structure and shifting the bill to small biz.
Of that there is no doubt.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Politicians allow campaign finance. Do you think unions don't spend tons of money? Corruption doesn't know party boundries.
