"See why your weekly groceries increased in cost from $20 a week to $150 a
week - for the same items!"Hold on... let me get this right.
Mike Richards uses this as an example of rising cost - as part of an argument
that we should not raise wages. I am not sure what time scale he is using
here... but in the 30 years I have been married, I have never paid $20 a week
for groceries. Even as a missionary, I didn't spend that little more than
30 years ago.So lets say this $20s a week for groceries is back in
the 60s... or earlier. His argument is that we should not raise wages over the
last 50 years.... and had we not done that.... that food would not have gone up
in cost? That wages is the leading cost influencer? I am lost on what the
point he is trying to make here. There is no linear corollary
between wages, inflation, and cost of production or sales.
re: Open Minded Mormon (Friday morning)...The Good old days
weren't always good and tomorrow ain't as bad as it seems - Billy
JoelOnly a fool trips on whats behind them - Ray Lewis
to Open Minded MormonAre you saying Mountanman needs to pay
attention to RDJ's speech in Iron Man where he is telling off the Vanity
RE: 2bits "I feel for the next generation. Because of failed leadership,
we are giving them a country with more debt than they could EVER pay, "Baloney. Federal debt was being retired handily during the Clinton
years because Clinton dared to tax the super wealthy. It didn't hurt them
any. The 1990's were great years for business.But when Bush II
took over he couldn't wait to cut taxes for the wealthy, fought two wars
off budget, and we now have the debt load of the present. But it is EASILY
taken care of. Your much despised Clinton was doing it nicely. Watch Frontline "Ten Trillion and Counting." Please watch for an
understanding of our present national debt.
The whole "cutting emissions to reduce warming" is pure speculation.
Since there isn't statistically significant correlation between rising
atmospheric CO2 and global temperature, it's hard to see how that's a
rational statement. Find some other excuse to raise taxes.
Finally someone had the courage to tell us the truth. After all the beating
around the bush that has been goin on we finally know what this is all about.
Businesses are not allowed to make a profit in America! All of that evil money
belongs to the government and only the government has the right to tell us what
to charge and what to pay.Today they demand that businesses stop
making money. Tomorrow they'll demand that no empoyee can make a profit.
No more worries about savings accounts or 401Ks or retirement. The government
will take care of us, cradle to grave. Today they want a carbon tax. Tomorrow
they'll want a breathing tax.But wait, this is AMERICA where
businesses expect to make a profit and workers expect to make a profit. This is
AMERICA where hard work pays off. This is AMERICA where anyone who is willing to
scrimp and save and sacrifice can own his own business. Maybe somebody needs to
spread the word. Some people must have just gotten off the boat and they might
not understand what free-enterprise means.
J ThompsonSPRINGVILLE, UT2:54 p.m. July 11, 2014L
WhiteSpringville, UT3:05 p.m. July 11, 2014========= Ummmm, Let's see if I understand this pattern.Always the same comment, Always the same time, Always the same
SPRINGVILLE, UTFYI -- Look on line -- A decent solar panel kit
starts as low as $179And urban Wind Turbines can be had for >$500Funny -- This NewsPaper's parent KSL run an excellent story
less than 2 weeks ago of a guy in Kaysville annual bills went from ; Gasoline = $2550Natural Gas = $2600Electricity = $1550$6700
per yearTo ZERO. [is now all electric, including his cars] and because of his excess sold back to RMP -- his entire
out-of-pocket system is less than $15 per month!Oh and one final
note -- My LDS Church [authorized by the LDS 1st Presidency] is 100%
solar.The building makes WAY more than it could ever need, especially mostly sitting empty Mon-Sat so it sells it back to RMP as
well.I wish I could side with you, but my testimony of the
Lord's Church leans the other way.Good Steward of the Earth,
Watch over and care for, Beautiful and Recycle.Eternal
concepts and commandments etc.~Peace
Mike Richards,The key phrase in your post of 7:17 am July 11, 2014 is
“including the profit I make.”If you as a business owner
choose to be too greedy then your product will be too expensive for me to buy.
If you sell basic items necessary for me to live but make your goods and
services too expensive for me to buy coupled with paying me as your employee too
little to buy these basic necessities, then the government (or perhaps a local
church) might have to subsidize my ability to live (i.e., buy the basic
necessities you sell). Then, the government will need to pay for this subsidy
so they tax you as a business owner. Lots of companies are jumping on the band
wagon of self-imposed higher minimum wages for their workers. If employers
would pay a fair wage there would be less taxes needed from the wealthy and from
business owners. Of course this article was about carbon tax so just substitute
the words “self-imposed carbon pollution limitations”.
JSF: Sounds like exactly what is going on here in the good old USA. Try these
for a fit: "Hey if Wal-Mart doesn't provide health insurance for your
family, sucks to be you." "Why should you need food stamps, just get
another job." "Unions don't do any good they just bleed you dry
with the dues." "If your family member gets really sick and you have to
take out bankruptcy, just ask your Church for help." And last but not
least: "So what if the minimum wage wage raised to $10.20 adjusted to
today's dollars under Ronald Reagan, that was then and is now and you
don't deserve a penny more than you are making!" Now light my cigar
for me will you?
Let's see if I understand this thread. Some people are telling us that
taxing businesses more is good because it will force those businesses to buy
non-existant technology to reduce our "carbon footprint" by less that
1/2 of one percent. Is that correct? Do I have it right? I've
looked around my town and nobody has a cost-effective solar system that my hubby
can bolt onto our roof that will save us any money. I cannot even buy a
windmill to do that. Everything that I have looked at is so expensive that the
government has to give a subsidy to get people to buy it. I do not know about
you, but I am not going to ask my neighbors to pay more taxes so that I can buy
something that costs too much and provides too little,Other people
tell us that paying people more to do no more than they're already doing is
a good thing. Where do I sign up? I do not think that any business would ever
do that, but I don't live in Washington, D.C.
Selling the lie, selling the lie.
A poster tells us that increasing costs is good for business in the long run.
That doesn't make sense. A business must make a profit or it will have to
close its doors. Except in non-free countries, every business competes against
other businesses that provide the same service. All of those businesses make
about the same percentage profit, unless they have some magic behind their
operations. If those businesses have incereased cost, they will eventually have
to raise prices or they will have to close. That's the first thing that
any banker will tell you if your present a business plan to the bank.If prices go up, the buying power of minium wage workers goes down. Anyone
should be able to understand that concept. If buying power goes down, the
minimum wage worker is no better off than he was before the "government"
gave him an unearned raise.When government interferes, people
suffer. Old folks on a fixed income do NOT get a "wage" increase when
government raises the minimum wage. They suffter. But, to some, they're
expendable. Too few of them vote.
And the goal of China's communism, income equality. Why do they have
millionaires, not capitalism, but corruption. Party elitists work the system.
Who pays, the state owned workers pay for it. Workers of the world unite, with
the systems in place in Cuba, Venezuela, Russia, and China, you to can live a
life of joyous poverty while you starve to death. Options for not going along,
starve to death.
A study from Berkeley last year showed that the world could easily be powered by
solar and wind. The Citizens Climate Lobby website has a plan supported by eight
Nobel economists to tax carbon fuels and give that tax money to consumers,
100%.The tax increases annually, and the market phases out fossil fuels as
people choose solar and wind because it's cheaper. The tax goes on imports
from carbon polluters like China, forcing them to go green to go green to
compete. We get that tax money and can buy U.S, products with it. This plan uses
conservative economic principles, no government regulations needed and a new
REMI economic study shows it would create 2.8 million jobs and add $80-90
billion to GDP annually, so you don't even have to think climate change is
a problem to support this idea.
Venezuela's newest tax. "Anyone departing from the Simon Bolivar
International Airport of Maiquetia in Caracas now faces a levy of 127 bolivars
($18) to pay for a new air conditioning unit installed earlier this year"
Yes taxes don't raise the cost of living.
2 bitsCottonwood Heights, UTAs long as our population continues to
grow... (whether by birth, or immigration)... we will need MORE energy (NOT
LESS).======== When was the last time you bought a car
or truck getting 8 mpg?Tell me you never look for the most efficient
appliances? We need LESS, when we USE less.Even with more
people, we can use less -- IF we are samrt, and use our God given
Intelligence.The Scriptures tell us over and over again, there
is enough and to spare if we use things "sparingly" [not my words,
God's words].There is enough for need, but not for greed.
As long as our population continues to grow... (whether by birth, or
immigration)... we will need MORE energy (NOT LESS).We will need ALL
sources of energy we currently have and then some... so keep working on the
alternative, but don't cut off existing energy sources or make them
skyrocket in price. That only hurts us, AND our economy.If you
want your kids to have jobs... work on the alternative, but don't blast the
pillars on the bridge we are currently using. We will need it for awhile
longer.If you don't care if there is no industry in the USA,
don't care if your kids have jobs... go ahead and play the political dogma
game...===========I feel for the next generation.
Because of failed leadership, we are giving them a country with more debt than
they could EVER pay, and a country with no jobs even if they WANTED to work and
pay their debt.And if the radical environmentalists are right,
it's only WORSE... we will also give them a world with no breathable air,
no clean water, no eatable food (genetic mutations) most cities under water, no
I can see the newest tea party motto now:"Government corrupts
everything... But keep your darn government hands off my oil subsidies!"
Re: jsf "Give it over to the government, inquire why Venezuela, and Cuba
cannot get reliable electrical service, or household goods. Government is in
charge. They either raise the taxes, or control the production."Socialism and capitalism are an ongoing pair. One is always an alternative to
the other. Which alternative is better depends on the situation, often the
local situation. Consider China. Though it has 100 billionaires it is still
substantially socialist. The enormous Chinese growth rate (~ 8%) is in large
part due to centralized socialist planning. Both socialism and capitalism can
work well, and can work well in cooperation. Of course either can miss-fire.
SG in SLC you are right at one level, but you do not account for each layer of a
product involving an additional cost before reaching the final consumer. Give it over to the government, inquire why Venezuela, and Cuba cannot
get reliable electrical service, or household goods. Government is in charge.
They either raise the taxes, or control the production.
@ Mike Richards, the biggest flaw in your argument is that an increase in the
minimum wage doesn't work for business. The reality is that it is actually
good in the long run. All the dire predictions made in the past when the
minimum wage is increased have always proven wrong at the macro level.
Re: Mountanman "If you want to incentivize alternative energy development,
keep the government OUT of it!"Nonsense! The most effective
agency of all time to develop energy resources was and is the Tennessee Valley
Authority - both hydro and nuclear. Your ideology is showing.
(...Continued)In my example (all else being equal), if an added
Carbon Tax increased the unit overhead cost from $0.30 to $0.34, the "widget
seller" might only be able to increase the price to $1.02 without losing
additional total profit, thus passing on $0.02 of the tax increase and absorbing
the other $0.02 in decreased profit margin.If you are always able to
pass ALL of your fixed and administrative overhead cost increases on to your
customers, then apparently you operate a monopoly, or sell a good or service
that is so price-inelastic (like insulin) that all of your customers will
continue to buy from you, regardless of the cost. Most business, however, have
to take demand into their price-setting decisions, and usually end up passing on
only part of any fixed and overhead price increases, and absorbing the rest.
Mike Richards,To your, "ALL COSTS are passed on to the customer.
ALL of them", I would say, "No, not ALL of them (usually)".To understand why not all costs are necessarily passed on in the form of price
increases, you have to understand the following equation:Unit Price
= Marginal Direct Variable Cost + Allocated Overhead Cost + Profit MarginExample: If it costs $0.60 in direct materials & labor to produce a
"widget", and the per-unit share of overhead costs allocated to
producing a "widget" is $0.30, then the selling price of the
"widget" might be $1.00, yielding a profit margin of $0.10 per unit, or
10%. Let's also assume that this price happens to be the "sweet
spot"; cutting the price to $0.95 doesn't yield enough increased sales
to squeeze out more profit, and increasing the price to $1.05 decreases sales
more than the $0.05 increase in marginal profit can make up for.
Taxes, incentives, blah, blah, blah. Typical contemporary liberalism. No, the
federal government needs to establish a green energy corporation to drive green
energy technology to completion. Think TVA.
Esquire,You and I agree on one thing, the numbers don't lie.
Your example failed to account for the increased cost of almost everything in
America when the minimum wage is raised. In the food industry, the farmer pays
more to produce a crop. That cost is passed on. The pickers are paid more to
pick and pack the produce. That cost is passed on. McDonalds passes those
increased costs on as well as the increased costs of paying their own employee.
Every shop in America raises prices to cover increased cost. Look it up. See
why the cost of a meal has increased from $2.00 to almost $7.00 at McDonalds.
See why your weekly groceries increased in cost from $20 a week to $150 a week -
for the same items!When costs increase, prices increase. If prices
become too high, businesses fail. When businesses fail, people are fired.
Unemployed people don't get a wage. The "numbers"
support everything I've written. The numbers don't lie.
@Mike RichardsWe wouldn't have increasing wealth inequality in this
nation if it weren't for rich people deciding to keep more for themselves
rather than passing part of it along to the employees.
Businesses are doing a lot better under Obama, democrat rule, than they ever did
under Bush, republican rule.
@ Mike R., I think everyone agrees that raising the minimum wage affects
business. Those who pay a higher wage acknowledge that it does, but it's a
price they are willing to pay. It's good for business, good for employees,
and good for society. Take Zingermans in Ann Arbor, Michigan. This deli and
bakery pays higher wages and thrives. It's a fabulous operation. The
employees are dedicated to the company and have a good attitude. Customer
service is excellent. The product is terrific. Bigger companies have seen
similar results. You operate under the assumption that only the short-term
financial impact of the business should be the deciding factor. The rest of us
look at the bigger picture. The government, from the days of Washington on, has
always taken actions for the general welfare of the people. A higher minimum
wage is in the greater good of all, including a well run business. Your cheap
shot on President Obama doesn't change this fact. By the way, business has
done very well overall under President Obama. I know you won't want to
admit it, but the numbers don't lie.
Some people think that raising the minimum wage will not affect business. Have
they ever got their heads in the sand. When government DICTATES that a business
must pay a higher wage, the business owner has two choices: He can either raise
prices or he can fire employees. He will not give the government anything.
Either his customers will suffer or his employees will suffer.ALL
taxes, whether they be carbon taxes or minimum wage taxes are passed on. When people have worked for Government all their lives they have too
little experience about private sector issues to comment, but that doesn't
stop them from telling us who own and operate businesses in the private sector
how things work. That is Obama's problem. He thinks he knows how to run a
country when he couldn't run a lemonade stand without government subsidies.
There are many who say, "But why should we reduce emissions if China or
India is still polluting?"To them I ask, "If your neighbor
uses their living room as a toilet, should you do the same?"
MountanmanHayden, IDIf you want to incentivize alternative energy
development, keep the government OUT of it! The government corrupts everything
it touches! Have we learned nothing from Solyndra and dozens of other government
subsidized disasters? ========== You guys and your
Solyndra $200 million red-herring.Tell you what -- I'll
support you the very second you begin to critisize ALL corruption.BIG Oil
and their $25 Billion annual subsides, The Corporate Welfare Queens of
WallStreet, and your friends and neighbors there in Idaho, the Farmers.BTW -- Nuclear Energy -- Government funded.Solar
Panels were devolped by NASA -- under Government funding.Modern Wind
Turbines were devolped by Boeing and GE in the energy crisis of the 1970's
using Government funding [ironically, the Chinese build them now, because
America dropped them and went back to cheap Middle Eastern Oil and Expensive
Wars for it], Bio-fuels -- Again, Government funded -- This time you
can lay some of the blame on Utah State University.But go ahead with
your Government hating, Business worshipping....It might make you
feel better, but it is not reality.
That just silly, we need to do as the republicans say, "Nothing." So,
we will be dead, and it will be our children's problem. See, fixed the
republican way. Kick that can down the (cracked, pot holed, rotting interstate)
If you want to incentivize alternative energy development, keep the government
OUT of it! The government corrupts everything it touches! Have we learned
nothing from Solyndra and dozens of other government subsidized disasters?
Private businesses will develop alternative energy if there is a reasonable
assurance they can do so profitably! Otherwise, it will never happen and the
government squandering billions of taxpayer dollars can not, will not change
Americans will vehemently resist any kind of tax, regardless of how positive the
outcome. It's why our infrastructure is falling apart. We went into the
Iraq war with the promise of tax cuts. And so, we shall eschew any kind of levy
to encourage development of a new energy economy, instead sticking to
petrochemicals. The down side to that strategy, aside from the environmental
damage, is that fossil fuels are going to get more expensive on their own. And
we're not going to have the infrastructure in place to replace them.
@Mike RichardsSouth Jordan, UtahAnyone who tells us that
businesses will absorb the cost of a new tax know too little about running a
business. ALL COSTS are passed on to the customer. ALL of them.7:17
a.m. July 11, 2014========== If that be the truth -- per
you yourself -- Then you have either been lying or not being 100%
truthful.Because raising the minumum wage wouldn't effect a
BUSINESS or the Owners one single iota.
The only problem is that the U.S. cutting carbon emissions will have very little
effect. Last week I heard one of the top climate scientists say that if we
implement all of the plans that Obama wants it will only reduce global
temperature by 0.5 degrees over 100 years. Wrecking our economy for such a
marginal gain is not smart. As for government incentives, we all
saw how well Solyndra worked out. Billions of taxpayer dollars have been spent
on green energy companies that went under. Of course many of their Obama
supporting investors did not make out too badly as we covered their losses.
Those of us who are in business know that ALL costs of doing business MUST be
reflected in the prices that we charge. When I drive to a customer's place
of business, the customers has to pay $0.55 per mile for all mileage, going and
coming to his place of business. He has to pay for the time that it takes to
drive to and from his business. He has to pay part of the cost of the computers
I use to solve his problem. In the hourly charge that he pays are the hidden
costs of electricity and heating that I use to run my business. He pays his
share of the taxes that I owe on the money that I earn to service his account.
In other words, my customers have to pay for everything associated with running
my business, including the profit that I make.Anyone who tells us
that businesses will absorb the cost of a new tax know too little about running
a business. ALL COSTS are passed on to the customer. ALL of them.
More taxes and more poverty as costs for goods for the poor skyrocket. Why do
tax junkies hate poor people. Environmentalists, progressives hate poor people.
Margaret Sanger offered her solution for the removal of poor people.
Progressives still support her methods and programs.
You could also put a carbon tax on imports so that U.S. manufacturers are not
put at a disadvantage.