18 to 33 year olds are more independent and more liberal, and their older counterparts are dying out. I always thought that age group was always more liberal than their older counterparts. So on the surface this doesn't sound like anything new.
However, while they tend to vote Democratic, they don't like the Democratic Party. That may represent a shift. Whether this spells doom for the GOP, I don't know. Nor would I guess how this will affect the future of the US.
The determining factor for the health of middle class in the US might have more to do with whether the country heads in a more conservative direction or a more liberal direction, rather than on which party survives.
http://theweek.com/article/index/257691 ... -dying-out (http://theweek.com/article/index/257691/is-the-republican-party-in-danger-of-dying-out)
QuoteA new Pew Research survey finds a demographic trend in the United States that threatens to push the Republican Party into permanent minority status unless it changes quickly.
The survey found that millennials — the generation of adults between the ages of 18 and 33 — vote heavily Democratic and have "liberal views on many political and social issues, ranging from a belief in an activist government to support for same-sex marriage and marijuana legalization."
They are also the most racially diverse generation in American history and it's a key factor in explaining their political liberalism.
But, as Pew notes, it is not the only factor: "Across a range of political and ideological measures, white millennials, while less liberal than the non-whites of their generation, are more liberal than the whites in older generations."
They are also the only generation in which self-described conservatives do not outnumber self-described liberals.
Meanwhile, the most loyal Republicans are growing older. As time marches on, their numbers are dwindling.
But Republicans do have an opening: Millennials may be more liberal, but they don't have much loyalty to the Democratic Party.
In fact, 50 percent of all millennials now describe themselves as political independents — the highest level of political disaffiliation recorded for any generation in the last quarter-century. They don't like either of the two major political parties.
Nonetheless, this generation mostly votes Democratic and has little in common with the Republican Party. Needless to say, it's a real problem for the GOP.
Not to worry SG, you can count god to be on the side of the gop, after all the p in gop is just a upside down d. :shock:
Actually the biggest problem the gop has is a severe messaging problem. They're going to have to get out of the entrenched right wing fundy mode, drop the abortion bullshit, the opposition to actual health care and social issues in general or yes, indeed go to minority status, but they were the minority for many years before the 80s.
The GOP won't die. The Democrats won't let them. If the GOP fell an actual opposition party might replace them.
Quote from: "Jason_Harvestdancer"The GOP won't die. The Democrats won't let them. If the GOP fell an actual opposition party might replace them.
For once we agree Jason. Every party needs their boogieman.
Oh, you got it. Jesse Ventura and his Libertarian cronies are just waiting in the wings.
The GOP is like a large, rotting corpse that refuses to believe it's dead. They won't die anytime soon.
I suspect you're going to see two major camps rise up: one will become more and more radical as they backlash against the liberalization of society, while another is going to put on a more mainstream face and try to convince us they aren't the same gay, poor, and brown person hating party of the past. It's already happening, somewhat. You saw it in the republican reactions to the veto of the Arizona bill. Some praised the decision to veto, while others criticized Jan Brewer as "caving into activists".
Turns out the Pew research on millennials was not just about the health of the GOP, as the first article suggested. Here is the Pew report in more depth:
QuoteThey [millennials] and all of their friends are on Facebook. They don't think twice about posting a selfie on Instagram. They support marijuana legalization, and they have trust issues.
You probably already recognize some, if not all, of those characteristics as hallmarks of the average millennial — the generation that is now between 18 to 33 years of age.
But how about this: the typical millennial does not have a college degree, and if they do, they also have about $27,000 in student loan debt. They don't think Social Security will be around for them, but they are nevertheless optimistic about their financial future.
That's part of the portrait that emerges from the Pew Research Center's big report on millennials, which was released on Friday.
So who is Mr. or Ms. Millennial? They are more often than not white, unmarried but hoping to tie the knot down the road. They describe themselves as politically independent, but lean Democratic. There's a good chance they voted for Obama and think Congress is doing a terrible job.
They prefer bigger government to fewer services and think the powers-that-be should be spending more money on them — but they're not so sure about Obamacare.
Their social views are progressive and have become more liberal over time. Support gay marriage? Yep. Support legal pot? You bet. In favor of legal status for undocumented immigrants? Check.
They believe in God — at least they think they do. But don't call them religious. Don't call them an environmentalist, either, and flip a coin before labeling them a patriot.
They have never known life without the Internet and they have 250 friends on Facebook — but also some misgivings about technology. They think people share too much online and they wouldn't dream of texting in church.
They have never known life without the Internet and they have 250 friends on Facebook — but also some misgivings about technology.
That last bit raises an interesting point. The average millennial may not even go to church — only 36 percent consider themselves religious — but experts point out that may be a function more of youth than their particular generation.
"Religious participation tends to rise with age," said Peter Levine, director of the Center for Information and Research on Civic Learning & Engagement at Tufts University.
He said that some of the qualities that stood out in the millennial survey were also found in other generations when they were younger.
About half of millennials said they don't consider themselves a patriotic person, but that was also true of Generation X'ers when they were younger — and they grew more patriotic over time, Levine said.
One of the most striking findings in the report was the overwhelming optimism of millennials about their financial prospects.
Even though seven in 10 think people their age face more economic challenges than their parents' generation, 86 percent say they either make enough money for their current needs or think they will in the future.
One of the most striking findings in the report was the overwhelming optimism of millennials about their financial prospects.
But as Levine notes, opinions about economics tend to change over the life course and the optimistic streak may just be the "timeless confidence of youth."
"It may just be when you're 20, you think things are going to be better," he said.
Heidi Shierholz, an economist at the Economic Policy Institute, said the economic realities of their generation might make millennials more pessimistic over time.
Research shows that those who entered the labor market during or after the Great Recession will take a economic hit as a group, with depressed earnings that could stay that way for a decade or longer.
"As they start to mature into brackets where you want to think about starting a family and buying a house, they will realize they were just unlucky to be born at a time where they were entering this labor market, and that will weigh heavy on them," said Shierholz, who studies young workers.
Another possible optimism-killer: As millennials struggle financially "it's just a matter of time before people start blaming them," she said.
"It wont be long before they start getting labeled as lazy or disaffected," she said.
Other views are unlikely to change over time. Sixty-eight percent of millenials say they support gay marriage and Levine said that it's clearly generational and will not taper off with time. It's the same with marijuana legalization, where millennial opinions are following the same trajectory of other generations, like Baby Boomers.
"It wont be long before they start getting labeled as lazy or disaffected."
Eight in 10 millennials support some path to legal status for undocumented workers, and Levine said that won't die down — in large part because 19 percent of the age group "can be loosely characterized as an immigrant."
One result that is certain to be different five years from now is the number of millennials on Facebook — currently 81 percent, according to Pew.
Lara Bashkoff of Bashki Global Consulting said the older end of the cohort may stay loyal, but she expects the overall percentage to drop.
"I don't think the young ones going to be as active on Facebook and there is definitely going to be something more compelling out there," she said.
That's odd. You'd think that the freedom to vote would necessarily generate the demand for democratic representatives that would represent the will of the people.
Seems like the system is broken when there's no one that millennials can vote for that represent their interests.
Peoples political views change over time. They tend to become somewhat more conservative, not necessarily gop or libertarian, but more center as they age, but the center which often shifts left to right and vica versa. They also tend to vote more on local issues as they age as local law becomes more relevant in their lives with school bonds, local taxes, which mayor or city council members serve their intrest more and so on.
The pendulum swings to and fro, hither hather and where it lands nobody knows.
Quote from: "Jason78"That's odd. You'd think that the freedom to vote would necessarily generate the demand for democratic representatives that would represent the will of the people.
Seems like the system is broken when there's no one that millennials can vote for that represent their interests.
I'm quite sure it's broken. Given confidence scores in congress, it would seem like nearly everyone thinks it's broken. The system benefits politicians, not people.
It favors m o n e y and little more.
People don't want to work and love handouts. In this day and age you and your family could live on handouts. Making illegals legal for votes. Apparently deporting illegals is "racist". Because all illegals are non white....Make African Americans believe the modern day GOP is not any different than people who enslaved and oppressed their ancestors. Saying that young African American boys/ men are being targeted by the so called racist gun toting Republicans The list goes on and on. Promise something, do nothing,blame someone else.
QuotePeople don't want to work and love handouts.
You hang around with the wrong kind of people.
Quote from: "Plu"QuotePeople don't want to work and love handouts.
You hang around with the wrong kind of people.
:blahblah: These days being on the right side of things is apparently wrong.
Gosh, we have a conservotard. How amusing. *click* :roll:
Quote from: "HomophobicAtheist"Quote from: "Plu"QuotePeople don't want to work and love handouts.
You hang around with the wrong kind of people.
:blahblah: These days being on the right side of things is apparently wrong.
I'm not the one hanging around with people who love handouts...
Social security is not a handout. It's a retirement fund held in TRUST by the government. When Reagan started stealing from it and nobody said anything that's when the handouts started, to the government.
BTW, Michelle Bachman recently said the Tea Party was an intellectual movement. :rollin:
Quote from: "HomophobicAtheist"Quote from: "Plu"QuotePeople don't want to work and love handouts.
You hang around with the wrong kind of people.
:blahblah: These days being on the right side of things is apparently wrong.
...you know what, fuck it, it's too damn early for me to waste brain cells on this.
Quote from: "HomophobicAtheist"Quote from: "Plu"QuotePeople don't want to work and love handouts.
You hang around with the wrong kind of people.
:blahblah: These days being on the right side of things is apparently wrong.
Who doesn't want to work and enjoys handouts corporate America and CEO's? Pretty much. Biggest takers in the U.S. that provide no real work. Corporate welfare and tax breaks dwarf so called entitlement programs. Fuck them all. Only reason I wish there were a god so the bastards could rot in the hell they created.
Since US conservatives are mentally ill, don't care.
These are shill wedge issues anyway. Republicans take evrry issue that's relatively unimportant then fan flames of discontent. Welfare was one such issue. Many people believed they were being scammed by someone getting nothing for nothing, a few hundred bucks a month each usually while at the same the banking system that ran under Glass Stegal was destroyed by republicans by the likes of Phil Graham and who got billions for nothing. It wasn't grandma living on social security getting a few hundred bucks in foodstamps. Investment banks pulled off the biggest hiest in the history of wealth thanks to the gop.
Quote from: "HomophobicAtheist"People don't want to work and love handouts. In this day and age you and your family could live on handouts. Making illegals legal for votes. Apparently deporting illegals is "racist". Because all illegals are non white....Make African Americans believe the modern day GOP is not any different than people who enslaved and oppressed their ancestors. Saying that young African American boys/ men are being targeted by the so called racist gun toting Republicans The list goes on and on. Promise something, do nothing,blame someone else.
TROUBLED ASSET RELIEF (TARP) BAILOUT PROGRAMS FUNDS DISBURSED*
(IN BILLIONS) MAXIMUM AT-RISK*
(IN BILLIONS) OUTSTANDING*
(IN BILLIONS)
*See Glossary at the bottom of this page for definitions of "disbursed," etc.
Liquidity Loans for Banks and Financial Co.s
Capital Purchase Program (Treasury) $204.9 $218.0 $21.7
Capital Assistance Program (Treasury) $0 $0 $0
Systemically Significant Failing Institutions Program (AIG) (Treasury) $67.8 $69.8 $53.1
Targeted Investment Program (Treasury) $40.0 $40.0 $0
[Toxic Asset Purchases
Term Asset-Backed Securities Loan Facility ("TALF") (Mostly Federal Reserve, some Treasury) $67.0 $1,080.0 $12.9
Public-Private Investment Program: Legacy Securities Program (Treasury) $17.0 $1,000.0 $15.9
Public-Private Investment Program: Legacy Loans Program (FDIC) $0.728 n/a $0.728
Investor Loss Guarantees
Asset Guarantee Program (Treasury, FDIC & Federal Reserve) $0 $332.5 $0
Paying Banks to Loan Money to Small Business
Unlocking Credit for Small Businesses (Treasury) $0.4 $15.0 $0.2
Community Development Capital Initiative (Treasury) $0.6 $0.8 $0.6
Support for Housing Market
Home Affordable Modification Program (Treasury) $2.0 $45.6 $2.0
NON-TARP BAILOUT PROGRAMS FUNDS DISBURSED* MAXIMUM AT-RISK* OUTSTANDING*
*See Glossary at the bottom of this page for definitions of "disbursed," etc.
Support for Housing Market (Government Supported Enterprises, Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac, and Federal Housing Administration)
GSE stock purchase (Treasury) $164.4 Unlimited[1] $164.4
GSE direct obligation program (Federal Reserve) $169.0 $200.0 $116.7
GSE Mortgage-Backed Securities Purchase Program (Treasury) $220.0 $314.0 $101.0
GSE credit facility program (Treasury) $0 $25.0 $0
Fed mortgage-backed securities purchases (Federal Reserve) $1,128 $1,250.0 $911.9
Federal Housing Administration $0 $352.08 $0
Liquidity Loans to Banks and Financial Co.s
Direct loans to Bear Stearns via JPMC (Federal Reserve) $12.9 $12.9 $0
Lehman Brothers "wind-down" loan (Federal Reserve) $138.0 $138.0 $0
AIG loans and investments (Federal Reserve) $89.5 $122.5 $0
Term Securities Lending Facility ("TSLF") and Term Securities Lending Facility Options Program ("TOP") ( Federal Reserve) $233.6 $250.0 $0
Primary Dealer Credit Facility (Federal Reserve) $147.7 $147.7 $0
Asset-Backed Commercial Paper Money Market Fund Liquidity Facility ("AMLF") (Federal Reserve) $145.9 at least $145.9 $0
Term Auction Facility (Federal Reserve) $493.1 $900.0 $0
Commercial Paper Funding Facility (Federal Reserve) $349.9 $1,800 $0
Money Market Investor Funding Facility (Federal Reserve) $0 $600.0 $0
Expansion of System Open Market Account (SOMA) securities lending (Federal Reserve) N/A $36.0 N/A
Primary Credit Program (Federal Reserve) $111.9 $111.9 $0.02
Tri-Party Repurchase Agreements (Federal Reserve) $124.6 $124.6 $0
Purchase of Toxic Assets
Maiden Lane I (Bear Stearns) (Federal Reserve) $28.8 $28.8 $21.6
Maiden Lane II and III (AIG) (Federal Reserve) $43.8 $52.5 $19.8
Single-Tranche Repurchase Agreements (Federal Reserve) $80.0 $80.0 $0
Investor Loss guarantees
Money Market Mutual Fund (Treasury) $0 $3,355.3 $0
Foreign Central Bank Liquidity
Foreign Central Bank Currency Liquidity Swaps (Federal Reserve) $582.76 $755.0 $0
IMF Expansion (Treasury) $100.0 $100.0 $100.0
AGENCY SUBTOTALS TOTAL DISBURSED TOTAL MAX. AT-RISK TOTAL OUTSTANDING
Treasury $816.1 billion $5.79 trillion $458.1 billion
FDIC $0.7 billion $10.0 billion $0.7 billion
Federal Reserve $3.95 trillion $8.06 trillion $1.08 trillion
GRAND TOTAL: $4.76 TRILLION DISBURSED $13.87 TRILLION MAX. AT-RISK $1.54 TRILLION OUTSTANDING
United States Federal
State and Local Government Spending US CA >
Pop: 318.4 million
-5yr -1yr Fiscal Year 2014 in $ billion +1yr +4yr
View: people old default radical census programs COFOG Fed
Gov.
Xfer State
Local
Total chart
- Pensions 928.5 0.0 208.6 44.9 1,182.1
- Health Care 973.6 -324.8 478.3 141.4 1,268.4
- Education 141.8 -96.5 285.7 673.0 1,004.0
-
Defense 830.9 0.0 0.8 0.0 831.7
[–] Welfare: Start chart 393.7 -119.0 147.3 82.6 504.5
- Family and children 105.5 0.0 11.8 9.0 126.2
- Unemployment 59.7 -3.5 4.8 0.0 61.1
- Unemployment trust 0.0 0.0 64.0 0.3 64.3
- Housing 53.3 -11.0 8.7 36.3 87.2
- Social exclusion n.e.c. 175.2 -104.5 51.0 36.8 158.6
- R and D Social protection 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
- Social protection n.e.c. 0.0 0.0 7.0 0.1 7.1
- Protection 36.0 -7.1 70.8 162.4 262.2
- Transportation 103.8 -70.5 122.9 154.6 310.8
- General Government 53.4 -4.3 53.2 72.4 174.7
- Other Spending 93.2 -18.2 76.9 330.1 482.0
- Interest 222.9 0.0 49.4 65.4 337.6
- Balance 0.0 -0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
- Total Spending 3,777.8 -640.3 1,493.8 1,726.8 6,358.1
- Federal Deficit 744.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 744.2
- Gross Public Debt 18,246.9 0.0 1,142.6 1,800.1 21,189.5
I dunno solitary. I'm getting $198 a month in foodstamps. I may be bankrupting our nation all alone. Those billions though went to the JOB CREATORS! :shock:
Quote from: "AllPurposeAtheist"I dunno solitary. I'm getting $198 a month in foodstamps. I may be bankrupting our nation all alone. Those billions though went to the JOB CREATORS! :shock:
Here's the thing that gets me about that. Its small business owners(like myself) who are creating jobs, and if they are actually giving money to the "job creators"....
I WANT MY GUBMENT MONEY!!!
Business owners are job creators like automobiles are carbon dioxide factories. It's just an unfortunate side-effect that they haven't been able to get rid of yet.
Quote from: "Plu"Business owners are job creators like automobiles are carbon dioxide factories. It's just an unfortunate side-effect that they haven't been able to get rid of yet.
...
Actually most small business owners I know, like their employees. Myself included.
Quote from: "Moralnihilist"Quote from: "Plu"Business owners are job creators like automobiles are carbon dioxide factories. It's just an unfortunate side-effect that they haven't been able to get rid of yet.
...
Actually most small business owners I know, like their employees. Myself included.
How much do you like them? Enough to pay them enough to afford health, car, home insurance and not have to go to the local food shelter?
Psah......bro, I know it's a tricky business and a delicate balance between what pay is practical. That is where loyalty both ways comes in. What would you do if you really hit it big, keep the cash cow to yourself or at least spread a little of the wealth around that is reasonable? That's the measure of human being to me.
Quote from: "Moriarty"Quote from: "Moralnihilist"Quote from: "Plu"Business owners are job creators like automobiles are carbon dioxide factories. It's just an unfortunate side-effect that they haven't been able to get rid of yet.
...
Actually most small business owners I know, like their employees. Myself included.
How much do you like them? Enough to pay them enough to afford health, car, home insurance and not have to go to the local food shelter?
Psah......bro, I know it's a tricky business and a delicate balance between what pay is practical. That is where loyalty both ways comes in. What would you do if you really hit it big, keep the cash cow to yourself or at least spread a little of the wealth around that is reasonable? That's the measure of human being to me.
Actually all of my employees have full company(read out of my pocket) paid benefits, are paid damn good(for the area, most own/rent their own homes no roommates), they all have new(ish) cars, and they all know exactly where I live(and are quite often over here for dinner).
As to me hitting it big, I did that during my career I own the land and buildings my 2 gyms are built on outright(thats why I can pay like I do and still make a good living), I invested quite well in property, mutual funds, cd's, general stocks, and gold/silver. I was happy with one gym, but I knew a lot of good fighters and trainers that needed work so I got in touch with Dana(White) and bought into the UFC gym deals and built another gym so that I could help those guys out, and myself too(hey Im honest).
I make good money, I help my guys out, and there is a simple reason for that. Even though I have a shitload of cash and assets I still remember what it was like when I was coming up as a fighter and not having shit.
Quote from: "Moralnihilist"Quote from: "Plu"Business owners are job creators like automobiles are carbon dioxide factories. It's just an unfortunate side-effect that they haven't been able to get rid of yet.
...
Actually most small business owners I know, like their employees. Myself included.
Would you keep them all employed if you could fire them all without it affecting your turnover at all (ie; all their salaries would simply be added to your own profit)?
EDIT: perhaps a better phrasing would be, 'would you hire anyone if it made no effect to your turnover at all?'
Quote from: "AllPurposeAtheist"I dunno solitary. I'm getting $198 a month in foodstamps. I may be bankrupting our nation all alone. Those billions though went to the JOB CREATORS! :shock:
Well you know how it is. If you take advantage of a benefit you are entitled to, apparently you're a smoocher. But if a corporation takes advantage of a multimillion dollar tax loop, they are being an effective business.
I would love to see the gop die. The dems would then split into two parties: blue dogs vs. Progressives.
Posted via Tapatalk on tiny smartphone keyboard. Expect typos.
Quote from: "Atheon"I would love to see the gop die. The dems would then split into two parties: blue dogs vs. Progressives.
Posted via Tapatalk on tiny smartphone keyboard. Expect typos.
Rather like what happened after the Federalist party collapsed. Everyone was in the Democratic-Republican Party for a while until it split into the Democrats and the Whigs. Many former Federalists were in the D-R party, philosophically opposed to other D-R politicians. Just take a look at the election of John Quincy Adams.
A one party arrangement like that in modern times would have Bachmann and Palin running under the Democratic banner. Can you imagine a Democratic primary between someone like Pelosi and someone like Bachmann? Of course since they'd be fellow Democrats the usual "you're not a Democrat therefore you're a racist" campaign tactic wouldn't apply. Can you imagine Palin running in a Democratic primary
and getting a significant number of votes? Remember, former Republicans would be voting in this primary.
Then the ex-Republican Democrats and the blue dog Democrats would split off into a new party that is the Republican Party in all but name. And the remaining Democratic Party would actually be smaller due to the lack of the blue dogs. The status quo would be preserved under new names.
I prefer the scenario when the Whig Party collapsed and was replaced by a third party, even though most of the early Republicans were nothing more than rebranded Whigs.
Quote from: "Plu"Quote from: "Moralnihilist"Quote from: "Plu"Business owners are job creators like automobiles are carbon dioxide factories. It's just an unfortunate side-effect that they haven't been able to get rid of yet.
...
Actually most small business owners I know, like their employees. Myself included.
Would you keep them all employed if you could fire them all without it affecting your turnover at all (ie; all their salaries would simply be added to your own profit)?
EDIT: perhaps a better phrasing would be, 'would you hire anyone if it made no effect to your turnover at all?'
Yes I would. My guys(and ladies) are like family to me. I, as a business owner, realize that I wouldn't be where I am without their help and dedication.
Ok, now let's do the reverse. Do you currently make enough money to be able to hire another person, and if yes, are you actively looking to hire another person?
Does his business need to have another person?
Quote from: "Jason_Harvestdancer"Does his business need to have another person?
A valid question if you agree with my philosophy that job creation is an unfortunate side affect for businesses.
An irrelevant question if you believe that companies are job-creators in any other way that "only because they can't figure out a way not to."
Quote from: "Plu"Ok, now let's do the reverse. Do you currently make enough money to be able to hire another person, and if yes, are you actively looking to hire another person?
Its a mma gym, Im always bringing in new trainers(mostly from out of state) to help my guys out in their actual careers(all of my trainers are fighters).
But at the end of the day, the business still manages to turn a profit(and a good one at that). I have a couple amateur fighters that I have an eye on to become trainers(so I can let my guys that are close to UFC contracts dedicate themselves as fighters). Will I ever hire enough people so that Im at the break even point? Probably not, if I ever had that many people ready to be trainers Id probably go ahead and open another gym in another town(I think).
Im actually in the process of planning a third gym. Not a mma gym but a good old fashion lifting heavy shit for fun gym. I want to be the next Joe Weider(for those that don't know its this guy http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Weider (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Weider)). I want to help make America healthy, I want to be a driving force behind MMA, I want my gyms to be the gym that the everyone wants to come to.
Sounds like you're in a line of business where's there's still a huge amount of growth left :)
Quote from: "Plu"Quote from: "Jason_Harvestdancer"Does his business need to have another person?
A valid question if you agree with my philosophy that job creation is an unfortunate side affect for businesses.
An irrelevant question if you believe that companies are job-creators in any other way that "only because they can't figure out a way not to."
Do keep in mind that mine is not a normal business, as a mma gym there are only so many classes and time slots to go around, I could keep expanding(and am doing just that) as business dictates I need to. An employee works, so if you are asking if I am going to put a guy on payroll and let them do nothing for pay, then no I won't be doing that.
Yeah because there is a lot of room left for growth there is no effective difference between what I'm saying about how companies create jobs and what you are. It only starts to matter once you cap out in terms of growth. But it is why you say you wouldn't put a guy on payroll and let them do nothing. You only hire people because you have work available. You only have work available because you have something that needs to be done that can't be automated. (At least, I'm guessing you don't hire people to manually process all applications, but use a computer system for those kinds of things instead.)
(I'm also guessing you don't have shareholders breathing down your neck to maximize profits, which allows you to get away with being a decent human being.)
Quote from: "Plu"Yeah because there is a lot of room left for growth there is no effective difference between what I'm saying about how companies create jobs and what you are. It only starts to matter once you cap out in terms of growth. But it is why you say you wouldn't put a guy on payroll and let them do nothing. You only hire people because you have work available. You only have work available because you have something that needs to be done that can't be automated. (At least, I'm guessing you don't hire people to manually process all applications, but use a computer system for those kinds of things instead.)
(I'm also guessing you don't have shareholders breathing down your neck to maximize profits, which allows you to get away with being a decent human being.)
Which is why I gained a measure of respect for Apples CEO telling stock holders concerned with the cost of their efforts in "being green" to sell their stocks if they didn't like it. Something that was poo poo'd as something irrelevant in chat by some.
Quote from: "Plu"Yeah because there is a lot of room left for growth there is no effective difference between what I'm saying about how companies create jobs and what you are. It only starts to matter once you cap out in terms of growth. But it is why you say you wouldn't put a guy on payroll and let them do nothing. You only hire people because you have work available. You only have work available because you have something that needs to be done that can't be automated. (At least, I'm guessing you don't hire people to manually process all applications, but use a computer system for those kinds of things instead.)
(I'm also guessing you don't have shareholders breathing down your neck to maximize profits, which allows you to get away with being a decent human being.)
Once I hit the point of growth cap, there are still the gym sponsorships that I give out(where I pay them to train and represent my gym when fighting). There are also my friends that are also business owners, who love hiring my guys(because the show up and work their asses off). I know its odd to hear(see whatever) but I truly care for my guys and am willing to go to the mat for them. If someone needs a job and they aren't a fit in my gym, chances are I know a guy who's business they would fit in.
I don't really do the application thing, due to the specialized nature of my business so I(or one of my guys) puts forward a candidate for the job, we discuss the person, and if they are a fit we hire them.
Nope no shareholders, thanks to careful planning.
QuoteOnce I hit the point of growth cap, there are still
If there are still options, I don't think you've hit the growth cap.
But honestly the bottom line is probably that you care more about the people than the money, and that's great. It's not how really big business works, and it's a good thing you don't have shareholders, as that allows you to get away with this stuff. I wish more people would.
But ultimately they lose to people who care more about the money in many fields.
Quote from: "Plu"QuoteOnce I hit the point of growth cap, there are still
If there are still options, I don't think you've hit the growth cap.
But honestly the bottom line is probably that you care more about the people than the money, and that's great. It's not how really big business works, and it's a good thing you don't have shareholders, as that allows you to get away with this stuff. I wish more people would.
But ultimately they lose to people who care more about the money in many fields.
Not really, I could have 5 gyms in every city and town, at that point there is no room for growth of the business, I still sponsor people(paying them to train and fight). Sponsorship does nothing but promote the gyms, and at this theoretical point the only thing increased is revenue, which is at that point dumped back into the fighters pockets, doing nothing for the business but making money for the fighters.
Quote from: "Moralnihilist"Quote from: "Plu"Yeah because there is a lot of room left for growth there is no effective difference between what I'm saying about how companies create jobs and what you are. It only starts to matter once you cap out in terms of growth. But it is why you say you wouldn't put a guy on payroll and let them do nothing. You only hire people because you have work available. You only have work available because you have something that needs to be done that can't be automated. (At least, I'm guessing you don't hire people to manually process all applications, but use a computer system for those kinds of things instead.)
(I'm also guessing you don't have shareholders breathing down your neck to maximize profits, which allows you to get away with being a decent human being.)
Once I hit the point of growth cap, there are still the gym sponsorships that I give out(where I pay them to train and represent my gym when fighting). There are also my friends that are also business owners, who love hiring my guys(because the show up and work their asses off). I know its odd to hear(see whatever) but I truly care for my guys and am willing to go to the mat for them. If someone needs a job and they aren't a fit in my gym, chances are I know a guy who's business they would fit in.
I don't really do the application thing, due to the specialized nature of my business so I(or one of my guys) puts forward a candidate for the job, we discuss the person, and if they are a fit we hire them.
Nope no shareholders, thanks to careful planning.
Like the idea of a "weight only" gym; had a membership in Gold's gym some years ago, and frankly didn't care for the place. It was like a catchall with every type of apparatus but nothing specialized.
When I was a firefighter, I had access to the BYU gym. They had a great weight section for their athletes. It was cool, being able to do a workout either before or after my shift. And I was working out with serious athletes, not flabby businessmen. I admit I envy you. :-D
That would be fuckin great! I quit my gym after they remodeled and went down to 1, 1! squat rack. Every time I went there was some yuppie type using it for some kind of pull ups or something.