A letter from the BOSS

[tsetsefly]

Re: there is nothing original here

I sense 2 groups here, 1. those that like government intervention, and 2. those that have experienced first hand the enforcement of intervention. All governments are violet and coercive when it comes to enforcement.

The first group votes for the redistribution of wealth by taking from the minority being employers (bosses). This mentality has throughout history lead countries into Fascism such as Germany, Italy, Russia, and now USSA, Canada, etc.

The Keynesian economists have had control for 100 years and we continue to have business cycles where the masses suffer and the elites prosper. Group 1 gets hurt the most from the intervention that they desire, Therefor don't expect their mentality to change, ever, they will not see the harm that they do to themselves.

For example, they want low interest rates, government services, and retirement savings plans, like OMERS and Teachers. So government intervenes and what happened over the last 20 years? The result, pensions plans grow forcing a stock market boom, little or no money in banks accounts (low interest rates), borrowed cheap money for housing and non productive stuff like new cars.

The boom ends when the wages of group 1 cant afford the loans for all the stuff bought on credit, regulation for health care, ecoterroism, government services, etc. Market crashes to support loans with cash. Money Velocity hits the brakes causing GDP declines. Governement contiues to intervene for group 1 which pisses off the employers even more. Nationalization of Companies to big to Fail, Deflation that permits the elites to buy up the whole country, and then inflation that redistributes wealth back to the elite.

there is nothing original here.

and somehow "free market"principles are blame for this mess...

[*T*]

Re: A letter from the BOSS

All ownership of property implies violence.
To compensate labour with wages is a 'category error'.
If employees co-operatively owned the company, would we still see this conflict?

[metalman]

Re: A letter from the BOSS

All ownership of property implies violence.
To compensate labour with wages is a 'category error'.
If employees co-operatively owned the company, would we still see this conflict?

can't work. someone has to be in charge and accountable, else chaos. the greater the responsibility and accountability the greater the compensation.

that is the only way.

[Munger]

Re: A letter from the BOSS

well my little child, since you want to cry like one, you obviously have the
intellect of one. And most definitely you have never grown up enough to
experince the life of a real adult running a real business with real liability
and responsibility.

so tell my little man, why bother with your little man worthless comments?

Oh you've slayed me you brut.

[strittmatter]

Re: A letter from the BOSS

http://www.amazon.com/Poor-Richards-.../dp/1557095671



"Friends," said he, "the taxes are indeed very heavy, and, if those laid on by the government were the only ones we had to pay, we might more easily discharge them; but we have many others, and much more grievous to some of us. We are taxed twice as much by our idleness, three times as much by our pride, and four times as much by our folly; and from these taxes the commissioners cannot ease or deliver us, by allowing an abatement. Richard Saunders (aka-Ben Franklin)

All this "detailed" sparring to and fro. C'mon. The chessboard is large and the game pieces are many. If we don't like hand we've been dealt or have played it poorly, we DO have the power of choice whether to stay stuck or strive toward our own definition of increase - whatever "side" you are on.

Let's hear it now with the "Go cheer somewhere else, I live in the real world son." Please.

[don]

Re: A letter from the BOSS

who will invent anything?

That's a relevant response to my observations and question?

You're pretty good at the misdirection play ;)

[FRED]

Re: A letter from the BOSS

This letter, whether authentic or not, whether agreeable in tone or accurate in all of its assertions, is valuable at least in expressing the frustration of one man who has created a business and jobs and gives a voice to many who will not speak out but instead go quietly into the night. Some day we may all wake up and wonder where all the jobs and innovation went. Oh, how we have strayed.

"If there is a country in the world where concord, according to common calculation, would be least expected, it is America. Made up as it is of people from different nations, accustomed to different forms and habits of government, speaking different languages, and more different in their modes of worship, it would appear that the union of such a people was impracticable; but by the simple operation of constructing government on the principles of society and the rights of man, every difficulty retires, and all the parts are brought into cordial unison. There the poor are not oppressed, the rich are not privileged. Industry is not mortified by the splendid extravagance of a court rioting at its expense. Their taxes are few, because their government is just: and as there is nothing to render them wretched, there is nothing to engender riots and tumults." - Tell a Friend, Thomas Paine (January 29, 1737 – June 8, 1809)

[acric5]

Re: A letter from the BOSS

All ownership of property implies violence.
To compensate labour with wages is a 'category error'.
If employees co-operatively owned the company, would we still see this conflict?

Absolutely Wrong. Do not confuse violence with voluntarism.

Only government can legally visit violence and coercion. How else could the state collect tax from the masses.

Capitalism is about an invitation to voluntarily participate in an offer, it is only when the state enforces participation that legal violence is initiated.

Ownership is the means by which individuals obtain the incentive to create and produce, public approval or acceptance of production rewards ownership. Property rights create harmony and prosperity since the masses have choice which is the means by which the economy is self regulating. However the government by request from the masses continuously limits choice which is destructive to prosperity and leads to more violence.

to be blunt: the public doesn't know what good is, and that is reality.

[phirang]

Re: A letter from the BOSS

Absolutely Wrong. Do not confuse violence with voluntarism.

Only government can legally visit violence and coercion. How else could the state collect tax from the masses.

Capitalism is about an invitation to voluntarily participate in an offer, it is only when the state enforces participation that legal violence is initiated.

Ownership is the means by which individuals obtain the incentive to create and produce, public approval or acceptance of production rewards ownership. Property rights create harmony and prosperity since the masses have choice which is the means by which the economy is self regulating. However the government by request from the masses continuously limits choice which is destructive to prosperity and leads to more violence.

to be blunt: the public doesn't know what good is, and that is reality.

Yup, and that's why the proles will never overcome their elite.

[labasta]

Re: A letter from the BOSS

I wonder if the real argument is just about the concentration of capital.

Does it all end with us working for the government?


I remember talking to an employee at a German engineering firm which dealt with building pipes. I asked him when the company had formed etc. He said the turn of the century. There were over a 100 engineering firms doing that business at the time. Now (2003), there were only 2 or 3. They had done it by buying out the rest of the competition. I'm not sure what effect the two wars had.

Does that mean that every new type of business ends up as an oligopoly?

We all know that 100 firms employ more than 3 firms as the same type of job is eliminated. No need for 100 accountants.

Is this a real problem, a quagulation of capital?

There are so many possible culprits to the cause of unemployment:

1. machines?
2. race to the bottom (globalisation)?
3. oligopoly?
4. feminism? :p
5. red tape (includes regulation cash cows like "health care" insurance)

Does anyone have any more?


I'm reading a thread on propertypin at the moment on the treatment of Lidl and Aldi on their employees. They pay an average salary of 50k as opposed to the market rate fo 25K, but they own you. You work 80 hours a day and at weekends. I thought why not employ two people for 25K and work 40 hours a week? Of course, the reason must be that employing two people must cost a lot more than just their salary. If the additional cost of employing someone is 10k a year, then working one person to death at 50k is more cost effective than working two people at 25K.

This means that we have lots of people doing nothing and lots of people doing everything. Now that is bonkers!

[labasta]

Re: A letter from the BOSS

I just thought that the oligopoly situation can be remedied by inventing innovative new types of business: dotcom boom, alternative energy etc.

Technology has to be going forwarded all the time to create employment.


The only problem I see with this is that if a new technology has the potential to take away money from any of the older oligopoly businesses. The oligopoly businesses might have too much political power at that stage so as to prevent any "money reducing" technologies to come forward. At least, I would imagine so if the business was large enough.

Remember people talking about how computers would create the paperless office. The typewriter business took a nosedive though.

I remember reading about firestorm spark plugs from the late 90s.

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=abwXApkLhbc

Bosch tested it and it lasted for too long. They couldn't make as much money out of it.

I'm sure there have been lots more which fell by the wayside.
Sure, a few of these new technologies may be bogus but I bet a lot weren't.


Remember Dyson's complaint that other Hoover companies didn't want his vacuum cleaner because they made too much money on bags.


Engineered obsolesence. Money creator, but environmental destroyer. Solution?

[Louie.G]

Re: A letter from the BOSS

This letter, whether authentic or not, whether agreeable in tone or accurate in all of its assertions, is valuable at least in expressing the frustration of one man who has created a business and jobs and gives a voice to many who will not speak out but instead go quietly into the night. Some day we may all wake up and wonder where all the jobs and innovation went. Oh, how we have strayed.

Very true Fred, I agree fully.

For what it is worth, in 1984 I had dinner with my uncle in New Zealand. He was a professor of accounting and was often invited to lecture at many Universities around the world, including several prominent US ones.

At that time NZ moved to a deregulated economy, so I asked for his thoughts. He said deregulation did not work and in 20 to 25 years time we would have more regulation than I could dream possible. 5 to 10 years after that the economy would collapse because business would not be able to cope with all of the new regulation. Hmmmm stupid prediction I felt.

Well by 2006 we had more regulations than I dreamed possible. I had a business there employing 7 full time staff. By 2006 I had reduced it to one part timer. The cost of a minor office modification went from 5000 to 20000 NZD, if it was to be compliant with the new regulations. We spend more time complying with various regulations, filling out forms etc than we do administering the production, distribution and sales of goods. It seems to be the same here in the US with my US Office. Tax on a business is not only the amount the cheque is made out for. Often that is the smallest cost of the tax.

It seems to me that the only sector that was not subject to such stringent legislation was the FIRE sector, and we now know where they have taken us.

Sensible Govt policy is far more profitable than ad hoc self serving agendas (which is what most Governments provide), To kill the small business is to kill the economy. To kill innovation, is to kill growth.

Support the big business (like Govt does and is) then you get.......

"Most of the 100 largest US companies, including big banks that recently received federal bailouts, have foreign subsidiaries that may help the corporate parent avoid paying US taxes, according to a report released by congressional auditors.

The Government Accountability Office found that 83 of the 100 largest publicly traded US companies, based on 2007 revenue, have subsidiaries in jurisdictions that help reduce a company's tax burden.........

Two Democratic senators said they would introduce legislation to stop US companies from using offshore havens that deprive the Treasury Department of an estimated $US100 billion annually in lost tax revenues."

Link - http://www.businessspectator.com.au/...nt&src=ea&ir=4.

There is good and bad in everything, it is just the perspective that is different.

As for Politics, as I have stated before.... Poli = Many and a Tic is a blood sucking leach. Good luck getting sensible legislation.

Like the writer, I too am tired and pretty much had a guts full. So I might just drop out of the race and go lie on the beach.

Cheers

[labasta]

Re: A letter from the BOSS

concentration of power brings serfdom?

[Sharky]

Re: A letter from the BOSS

All ownership of property implies violence.

Sorry, you couldn't be more wrong. Private property is, in fact, at the core of any peaceful society.

It is actually the lack of private property that naturally leads to violence. If no one owns anything, then we can't be responsible for our own survival, and force is the only alternative.

If employees co-operatively owned the company, would we still see this conflict?

Running a company as a democracy is a sure path to bankruptcy. The reality is that most people have no idea what it takes to run a successful company. And if ownership is equalized (socialized), then the motivation to excel or to innovate is destroyed.

Also, the actual implementation of socializing companies is really not "equal ownership." Inevitably, someone gets put in a position of authority -- a position that can rapidly devolve into handing out favors to those who offer the most in return, not unlike the US government.

[santafe2]

Re: A letter from the BOSS

I'm gonna take on the target of the barbs here and tell all you whiners that
letter is DEAD ON!

I owned a business for 16.5 years before selling it. I didn't sell it because
I hated it, I sold it because I no longer trusted my government.

Every year my taxes went up, the rules and regs got more complex, and
my fears of litigation grew. One year my industry was the specific target
of state legislation that would have put me out of business -- as a favor
to the unions in the state. It missed making it out of the senate by one
vote, or I would ahve been toast.

I sold out in 2007, and was happy to be done with it. I took a big pay
cut, and my former employees definitely miss me as the new management
is really not much like I was as a boss. BUT... now I sleep at night.

I no longer wake up thinking about business. I no longer deal with a
multitude of taxing agencies that see me as a target for cash and
possible extortion. I no longer deal with everyone else's personal
problems and how they brought them to work.

No, I know that letter above well -- I could have just as well written
it myself. Except I took the final step. I got out.

Until you walk in another man's shoes, don't complain about how they
look.

I'm also a business owner and serial entrepreneur. And since no other business owners have spoken up to take the other side of the letter writer's opinion, I thought I would do it.

I would break the arguments in the above note and in the originating letter out into three main categories:

• Government does not deliver the value it should for the cost.
• Employees, same basic argument.
• Running a business is hard work.

Regarding the government; in the US I try to break this out into 3 general taxing entities and examine them separately. To think of it as simply "taxes" will not help identify how this burden can be shaped and/or shifted. That is, the business owner will be more likely to react instead of plan.

The Federal Government

• Has broad based personal income taxing authority but those powers should come as no surprise to a business owner. If they do, one is either ill-informed or unprepared.
• Does not require a business owner to take the majority of business profits through payroll. If one is doing that, it's foolish. A business owner who, (and this is almost all small business owners), takes compensation through a draw on profits, is paying less tax per dollar earned than an employee.
• Sets regulatory controls and sometimes makes these more stringent as time goes on. Any business owner who has a problem with federal regulation during the last 8 years, should sell their business today.

State Government

• Most states tax personal income but some do not. If, as a business owner, you don't like paying personal income tax you may have to locate yourself, your business and/or your warehouses in a more favorable location. This is called management.
• States also regulate but generally under the umbrella of federal regulations. If it's not true for your industry, you need to know the current law and proposed regulation.

Local Government

• Much more of a wild card. But as a business person you should know your mayor and your city councilors and maybe more importantly, they should know you.
• For example, locally we have the highest minimum wage laws in the country. I may not like it but it was certainly no secret when we started the business. We make decisions regarding the type of employee we want locally based in part on the minimum wage.

Employees

• I've occasionally hired employees like the ones mentioned above and in the originating letter but they've not been employed for long. Most of the time when an employee doesn't work out, it's my fault for not defining the position correctly, being too much in a hurry to fill a position or simply not interviewing as well as I should.
• There are great employees out there. People who amaze me with their ability to perform their jobs while assisting the betterment of the business.
• Compensation packages are tricky. I find the best have a base salary with a well defined upside for personal and overall business performance.

Running a business is hard.

• While outside influences like government, regulatory and employee cost and contribution are often sited as the problem, I'd estimate that 95-98% of small businesses fail because the owners were not good business people and/or made a critical error in business judgment.
• If it was easy, everyone would do it.
• Even though growing a business is hard, working hard will not make you successful. Many small business people are surprised by this. Hard work is only small part of success.