just the beginning

[striperman36]

I'm not focussed on the Union aspect of this. Companies have record cash on hand, but not hiring, 'because the economic climate' does not show the need to.
Well, sure maybe some people need to look at other professions for work but for alot of people it's we can't hire you, we have the positions but we aren't filling them
Or we can only give you 28 hours or whatever it is to keep them under the full-time level so they don't have to pay benefits and hire another person to make up the other hours of the role.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by striperman36

I'm not focussed on the Union aspect of this. Companies have record cash on hand, but not hiring, 'because the economic climate' does not show the need to.
Well, sure maybe some people need to look at other professions for work but for alot of people it's we can't hire you, we have the positions but we aren't filling them
Or we can only give you 28 hours or whatever it is to keep them under the full-time level so they don't have to pay benefits and hire another person to make up the other hours of the role.

True, what you said is definitely true.

However, if those businesses are sitting on that cash, instead of spending it, then there must be a reason for that. Most of those businesses are not charities, and it would be reckless of those businesses to spend that money until it makes sense for them to do so. If those businesses had a reason to believe that they could increase profits by spending that money, then they would have every incentive to do just that.

When a business has no idea what its tax rate is going to be, and no idea how much its health insurance costs will be, it makes it harder to know if now is the right time to make an investment.

I don't see what it good it does to blame the business. If the climate makes it better to sit on cash than to spend it, why blame the business for that? Why not focus on fixing the climate, to make it more conducive for rewarding growth?

[JohnnyD]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

True, what you said is definitely true.

However, if those businesses are sitting on that cash, instead of spending it, then there must be a reason for that. Most of those businesses are not charities, and it would be reckless of those businesses to spend that money until it makes sense for them to do so. If those businesses had a reason to believe that they could increase profits by spending that money, then they would have every incentive to do just that.

When a business has no idea what its tax rate is going to be, and no idea how much its health insurance costs will be, it makes it harder to know if now is the right time to make an investment.

I don't see what it good it does to blame the business. If the climate makes it better to sit on cash than to spend it, why blame the business for that? Why not focus on fixing the climate, to make it more conducive for rewarding growth?

Exactly.

When the economy tanked, businesses were forced to check their books and cut the fat. They cut unprofitable programs, reduced (or froze) pay and benefits, laid off nonessential workers and developed ways to run more efficiently. Like you said, the businesses aren't going to spend money just because they have it. They aren't going to hire more people, even though they can afford to, unless those people will directly contribute to the bottom line and that is where the issue lies. Businesses effectively reduced their liabilities which has helped them have more money, but are still having difficulty with reliably increasing revenue. Month to month numbers are all over the place - housing sales are up, then down; consumer spending is up, then down. Until the volatility really stabilizes, businesses will maintain a wait-and-see approach.

My business is right in that same category. Fortunately most of our employees get their benefits from their spouse but if I have to start paying for health care at these inflated costs, people will get laid off. We've cut our expenses and developed ways to operate with fewer people. Yeah, it would be nice to hire at least another full-timer or two but it isn't worth it until the dust fully settles.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by JohnnyD

Exactly.

When the economy tanked, businesses were forced to check their books and cut the fat. They cut unprofitable programs, reduced (or froze) pay and benefits, laid off nonessential workers and developed ways to run more efficiently. Like you said, the businesses aren't going to spend money just because they have it. They aren't going to hire more people, even though they can afford to, unless those people will directly contribute to the bottom line and that is where the issue lies. Businesses effectively reduced their liabilities which has helped them have more money, but are still having difficulty with reliably increasing revenue. Month to month numbers are all over the place - housing sales are up, then down; consumer spending is up, then down. Until the volatility really stabilizes, businesses will maintain a wait-and-see approach.

My business is right in that same category. Fortunately most of our employees get their benefits from their spouse but if I have to start paying for health care at these inflated costs, people will get laid off. We've cut our expenses and developed ways to operate with fewer people. Yeah, it would be nice to hire at least another full-timer or two but it isn't worth it until the dust fully settles.

You own your own business? Then you really know what you're talking about. For me it's just theory, but you live it every day. Good luck!

[JohnnyD]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

You own your own business? Then you really know what you're talking about. For me it's just theory, but you live it every day. Good luck!

Don't give me too much credit.

Most other small business owners I know personally (aside from one or two) have laid employees off - some had to lay themselves off for a couple months. Fortunately, we were able to avoid laying anyone off but, in doing so, had to freeze pays for a year. It sucks having to tell everyone "sorry, no raises this year" but I didn't want to put anyone out of a job unless absolutely necessary. However, we did give everyone a couple extra vacation days.

There is a glimmer of light at the end of the tunnel. Opportunities can be found and because of that, I'm working on another small startup to take advantage of them. The next 6-12 months will be very interesting.

[justplugit]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

True, what you said is definitely true.

However, if those businesses are sitting on that cash, instead of spending it, then there must be a reason for that. Most of those businesses are not charities, and it would be reckless of those businesses to spend that money until it makes sense for them to do so. If those businesses had a reason to believe that they could increase profits by spending that money, then they would have every incentive to do just that.

When a business has no idea what its tax rate is going to be, and no idea how much its health insurance costs will be, it makes it harder to know if now is the right time to make an investment.

I don't see what it good it does to blame the business. If the climate makes it better to sit on cash than to spend it, why blame the business for that? Why not focus on fixing the climate, to make it more conducive for rewarding growth?

Yup, and JD, a small business owner, is an example.

That's why we need incentives to grow small business that will fuel the economy
with jobs that will continue into the future, not government stimulus jobs that only last till the $$$ run out.

How difficult is this for the Administration to understand that?
Not at all, they just want to grow government.

[scottw]

Originally Posted by justplugit

Yup, and JD, a small business owner, is an example.

That's why we need incentives to grow small business that will fuel the economy
with jobs that will continue into the future, not government stimulus jobs that only last till the $$$ run out.

How difficult is this for the Administration to understand that?
Not at all, they just want to grow government.

cost of doing business continues to soar, gas, utilities, comodities are all way up, dollars is worth less so even if consumers spend their dollar, it isn't going very far and in many cases their dollar came from some government agency "safety net" transfer which at that point...is it even real money??? or just a IOU for and IOU? government at every level is looking for funds to fund the transfers and businesses are going to be the target, and they know that...OOPS..not supposed to say things like that...

[Raven]

Originally Posted by striperman36

Or we can only give you 28 hours or whatever it is to keep them under the full-time level so they don't have to pay benefits and hire another person to make up the other hours of the role.

it's for this specific reason the Government needed to create incentives for entrepreneurs and new business ideas to get more companies in the USA but they FAILED to go far enough

[scottw]

I hear that Obama's dear family friend and the new Governor of his home state is hiring a slew of investigators to find birth documents or something... to end....or possibly continue(not sure which he's doing) the "birther" controversy.....you could call it...creating jobs to save a job ....should be pretty easy work and Hawaii is really nice...