Biden Email Red Flag

[SHUHoopsFan]

You're just making stuff up honestly.

Employers not finding workers is because people aren't looking. People aren't looking because they either have a job or are content where they are. People are content where they are because employers have have to raise wages in the competitive environment.

That's not a supply side argument. People who own companies didn't increase wages to employees because of their personal 199A deduction. Wages are increasing more today than they did after the TCJA passed because employment is strong.

When you don't agree everyone is just making stuff up. Literally you're operating under the assumption people aren't actively looking for something better. That's just a joke of an assumption. You must be in high corporate world with little contact to the pee ons who make your pizza, cut your lawn, and cut your hair. We can't even keep college basketball players happy, but people who have kids to feed and put through school are just content.

 

[HALL85]

We employ over 1,200 people and what merge is missing is the turnover and productivity impact. I see it in the turnover numbers even though we have adjusted some rates.

People sitting at home for two years are going to develop bad work habits that will take time to recover. The phrase “Bare Minimum Mondays” was not a thing before WFH and the pandemic. People are more nomadic…moving from job to job every few months as there are jobs available so they will move on if everything isn’t to their liking. I see these resumes all the time and avoid hit them. Other companies operate in fear or accept it.

We were lucky….85% of our workforce had to come to work. A good chunk of the 15% are not tethered to reality.

 

[Merge]

When you don't agree everyone is just making stuff up.

No. I support my opinions with data.

Literally you're operating under the assumption people aren't actively looking for something better.

No. People always want something better. There is always turnover. If people aren't moving in an environment where there are more openings than people to fill them, it is because they are content - otherwise there is plenty of opportunity to leave. That is why wages have gone up.
If there were less jobs than people looking, wages would not be going up.

but people who have kids to feed and put through school are just content.

I did not suggest that. You keep switching your argument here.
You suggested a supply side argument that employers would pay people more because they have more. That has just never held true. Wages increased based on demand. That has always held true.

I

 

[Merge]

We employ over 1,200 people and what merge is missing is the turnover and productivity impact.

No. I'm arguing with his premise that non C corps would increase wages to employees because the owners are paying less personal tax. He's all over the place with his comments so it's hard to follow the discussion.

There is always turnover, but I hope you'd agree that the issue is not that companies can't find people because people "don't want to work". That is an absurd statement to make with employment rates this high. Again - Highest participation rate of prime age workers in decades.

 

[SHUHoopsFan]

No. I support my opinions with data.

I support my opinions with the real world living.

No. People always want something better. There is always turnover. If people aren't moving in an environment where there are more openings than people to fill them, it is because they are content - otherwise there is plenty of opportunity to leave. That is why wages have gone up.
If there were less jobs than people looking, wages would not be going up.

Talked to an accountant buddy of mine he wants to get rid of 2 people in his office and replace them for $200K-$250K each. Am I led to believe the workforce is so strong nobody good wants that job. You think 199A contributing to those amounts.

I did not suggest that. You keep switching your argument here.
You suggested a supply side argument that employers would pay people more because they have more. That has just never held true. Wages increased based on demand. That has always held true.

I suggested finding good workers is difficult for employers. It's in all industries. And it's true. Wages increase because the law is making them increase, not organically because of supply and demand. 199A is helping employers pay those wages.

 

[bac2therac]

You're just making stuff up honestly.

Employers not finding workers is because people aren't looking. People aren't looking because they either have a job or are content where they are. People are content where they are because employers have have to raise wages in the competitive environment.

That's not a supply side argument. People who own companies didn't increase wages to employees because of their personal 199A deduction. Wages are increasing more today than they did after the TCJA passed because employment is strong.

full time jobs are down

 

[Merge]

I support my opinions with the real world living.

On an intuition which is misguided. Otherwise the data would agree with you.

Talked to an accountant buddy of mine he wants to get rid of 2 people in his office and replace them for $200K-$250K each. Am I led to believe the workforce is so strong nobody good wants that job.

Without knowing any of the details there, maybe?
Again, I'm just not sure why you're arguing that the workforce is strong.
Any time unemployment is below 5%, the workforce is considered "full employment" and strong. If the workforce wasn't strong, he would have more applications than he would know what to do with for those jobs.

Wages increase because the law is making them increase, not organically because of supply and demand.

Wages shift with demand. If employers don't have a reason to pay people more, they won't. That has always been true. Again, wages are increasing more now compared to after the TCJA passed. It's because the market is very competitive for employees and employers have to pay more now compared to then.

 

[ed odowd]

Wonder why Biden didn’t try to get border bill passed when he had control of both houses in his first two years? Answer is he didn’t want any border restrictions,now under re-election pressure he is big border control guy wanting a 5k per day limit,wow what a tough guy.As I am sure all the dems on this board know anything over 1k per day was considered a crisis by Obama DHS secretary.My how times change.Joe making Obama look like far right extremist.

 

[SHUHoopsFan]

On an intuition which is misguided. Otherwise the data would agree with you.

Get out of the corner office and go talk to people. Would love to know what you hear. You can tell them they're wrong, the data says so.

Wages shift with demand. If employers don't have a reason to pay people more, they won't. That has always been true. Again, wages are increasing more now compared to after the TCJA passed. It's because the market is very competitive for employees and employers have to pay more now compared to then.

If you're telling me the market is competitive for employees and employers have to pay more, why would there be a need to make laws requiring companies increase pay.

 

[Merge]

Get out of the corner office and go talk to people. Would love to know what you hear. You can tell them they're wrong, the data says so.

I'm sure I've talked to as many as you have. Only difference is that I need to understand the data and how that translates into the economic environment and how that could impact credit losses for my clients.

If you're telling me the market is competitive for employees and employers have to pay more, why would there be a need to make laws requiring companies increase pay.

A free market in a strong economy works incredibly efficiently. The economy is strong right now and any wage laws don't really make a difference. That's why most retail even including Walmart starts higher than minimum wage. In a poor economy, they will revert down to minimum wage again which we needed a law to keep up with inflation.

 

[SHUHoopsFan]

I'm sure I've talked to as many as you have. Only difference is that I need to understand the data and how that translates into the economic environment and how that could impact credit losses for my clients.

That sounds great for big corporate clients. But the average entrepreneur who is getting a 199A isn't concerned about credit losses much as improving operations and just making a few more bucks. But I'm sure those on Wall St value the impact on their credit losses.

A free market in a strong economy works incredibly efficiently. The economy is strong right now and any wage laws don't really make a difference. That's why most retail even including Walmart starts higher than minimum wage. In a poor economy, they will revert down to minimum wage again which we needed a law to keep up with inflation.

So we're preparing for a bad economy? Is that the purpose of the laws?

 

[Proud NJ Sports Fan]

Joe Biden’s mental decline cannot be ignored

President Biden appeared confused while answering a question about hostage negotiations, then seemed to forget Hamas’ name, the latest gaffe in a pattern that raises concerns about his mental…

nypost.com