Death of the GOP?

[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.

[Jason Harvestdancer]

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.

[Moralnihilist]

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.

[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?

[Jason Harvestdancer]

Does his business need to have another person?

[Plu]

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."

[Moralnihilist]

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). 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.

[Plu]

Sounds like you're in a line of business where's there's still a huge amount of growth left :)

[Moralnihilist]

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.

[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.)

[Moriarty]

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.

[Moralnihilist]

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.

[Plu]

Once 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.

[Moralnihilist]

Once 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.

[stromboli]

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