Even when presented with evidence of just EXACTLY how Obamacare destroys jobs, you will still be talking out your ass about some bullshit that makes no fucking sense.
DO YOU GET IT NOW?
Stryker to cut jobs to offset excise tax impact
Thu, Nov 10 18:18 PM EST Nov 10 (Reuters) - Medical device maker Stryker Corp said it will cut 5 percent, or about 1000 jobs to largely offset costs related to the scheduled implementation of the new Medical Device Excise Tax in 2013.
Steve Ferguson, the chairman of Cooke Group (another device manufacturer) had this to say about the excise tax:
“Many companies are being forced to limit investments in R&D in the U.S. and go abroad. Further, many companies are looking to reduce their U.S. capital investment. For Cook, we had planned on making additional investments in U.S. communities. Now, because of the tax, those plans are on hold.”
Medical device maker Stryker Corp said it will cut 5 percent, or about 1000 jobs to largely offset costs related to the scheduled implementation of the new Medical Device Excise Tax in 2013.
That is complete BS. Companies do this all the time, they use a government tax or act to justify getting rid of people. It makes the workers and public angry at the government while they come off as the helpless victim.
Medical device maker Stryker Corp said it will cut 5 percent, or about 1000 jobs to largely offset costs related to the scheduled implementation of the new Medical Device Excise Tax in 2013.
That is complete BS. Companies do this all the time, they use a government tax or act to justify getting rid of people. It makes the workers and public angry at the government while they come off as the helpless victim.
Yup. Corporate opportunism. Meeting shareholder expectations since 1982…
Medical device maker Stryker Corp said it will cut 5 percent, or about 1000 jobs to largely offset costs related to the scheduled implementation of the new Medical Device Excise Tax in 2013.
That is complete BS. Companies do this all the time, they use a government tax or act to justify getting rid of people. It makes the workers and public angry at the government while they come off as the helpless victim.
Yup. Corporate opportunism. Meeting shareholder expectations since 1982…
Opportunism is woven into the fabric of capitalism. The goal of business is to generate wealth for those with a stake in the organization. Contrary to popular belief, business does not exist for the purpose of employing people. If a company can find a better way to optimize their profit:expense ratio, then they’re well within their rights - if not their obligation - to do so.
Some companies take a high(er) road and work harder to retain employees by cutting elsewhere. But make no mistake about it, when the rubber meets the road, employees are expendable (to the extent that ample work can still be accomplished).
Medical device maker Stryker Corp said it will cut 5 percent, or about 1000 jobs to largely offset costs related to the scheduled implementation of the new Medical Device Excise Tax in 2013.
That is complete BS. Companies do this all the time, they use a government tax or act to justify getting rid of people. It makes the workers and public angry at the government while they come off as the helpless victim.
Yup. Corporate opportunism. Meeting shareholder expectations since 1982…
Opportunism is woven into the fabric of capitalism. The goal of business is to generate wealth for those with a stake in the organization. Contrary to popular belief, business does not exist for the purpose of employing people. If a company can find a better way to optimize their profit:expense ratio, then they’re well within their rights - if not their obligation - to do so.
Some companies take a high(er) road and work harder to retain employees by cutting elsewhere. But make no mistake about it, when the rubber meets the road, employees are expendable (to the extent that ample work can still be accomplished).
So why give employers an excuse to cut employees then? It’s still the effect of gov’t regulation anyways. The effect is STILL that JOBS GOT CUT. There’s a cost to meeting incrased regulations and unfortunately since employees are so expendable, they’re the first to go. The effect is is still lost jobs. The cause is increased regulations.
Companies do this all the time, they use a government tax or act to justify getting rid of people. It makes the workers and public angry at the government while they come off as the helpless victim.
More anti-capitalist mythology. The leaders of companies do not have any interest in coming off as victims. Quite the opposite, in fact, since that would have the effect of driving their stock prices down, which is the last thing they want. What they do have an interest in is explaining their actions to stockholders or potential investors, and that’s what statements like this one accomplish.
curious that there is a tax on medical equipment if the goal was to reduce medical costs
You clearly do not understand. The medical equipment manufacturers will be a charged a “Tax” and that will be calculated, filed, paid and then that “Tax” will be paid out toward paying medicals costs for those that can least afford it…CLEARLY making medical costs cheaper.
Furthermore the ones paying it will be the ones with the most money…business. IT all makes complete sense.
Medical device maker Stryker Corp said it will cut 5 percent, or about 1000 jobs to largely offset costs related to the scheduled implementation of the new Medical Device Excise Tax in 2013.
That is complete BS. Companies do this all the time, they use a government tax or act to justify getting rid of people. It makes the workers and public angry at the government while they come off as the helpless victim.
This is the standard response to a liberal with no business sense. It amazes me every time I hear one of you say that no matter how much regulation we put on a business they aren’t going to react negatively to it, and when they do it is because they are evil. What would you do if tomorrow the gov’t told you you now had to report how much you paid your lawn guy each week and than had to pay SS tax on it, OR go through the trouble of filling out a 1099? You wouldn’t hire him, or you would go out of your way to make sure it doesn’t get the attention of the feds.
Do you people ever critically think? This isn’t a hard concept, so when I hear liberals spout the same nonsense, it means they are blinded by hate for success, they lack common sense, or their idealogical blinders prevent them from looking at things objectively. But then again, if they had any of the above, they would be by definition, conservative.
Companies do this all the time, they use a government tax or act to justify getting rid of people. It makes the workers and public angry at the government while they come off as the helpless victim.
More anti-capitalist mythology. The leaders of companies do not have any interest in coming off as victims. Quite the opposite, in fact, since that would have the effect of driving their stock prices down, which is the last thing they want. What they do have an interest in is explaining their actions to stockholders or potential investors, and that’s what statements like this one accomplish.
Absolutely. There’s no hidden agenda in their message to shareholders/media. There can’t be any other motivation to their blaming government for this. It’s not like it’s going to make anyone think that less regulation/taxes will lead to more jobs or anything like that, and who would then vote for a platform of less regulation/taxes. I mean, this company can’t be just trying to drive real wages down to increase profitability, because if they were they’d surely explain their actions to stockholders or potential investors.
There’s no hidden agenda in their message to shareholders/media. There can’t be any other motivation to their blaming government for this.
Do you honestly think that investors decide to buy or hold a company’s stock based on what they believe to be hidden political advice in the messages sent to stockholders?
I mean, this company can’t be just trying to drive real wages down to increase profitability, because if they were they’d surely explain their actions to stockholders or potential investors.
Not sure what ax you’re trying to grind here. If management can save on overall labor costs, other things being equal, that’s good news for stockholders.
You don’t think press releases ever engage in blame shifting? No one ever tries to find excuses for poor financial performance?
I don’t think investors are going to have much patience with excuses. More to the point, if the excuses point out some factor that is likely to detract from the company’s future profitability, they’re not going to sit there patiently watching their investment go down the drain. So what you describe just wouldn’t be self-interested behavior.
What Pinhead doesn’t understand is that we are eliminating a subsidy that this company was getting. he’s angry that the taxpayer is not funding corporate profits. mostly because he likes paying taxes and wasting the taxpayers money. that and because he’s never read “obamacare”.
There’s no hidden agenda in their message to shareholders/media. There can’t be any other motivation to their blaming government for this.
Do you honestly think that investors decide to buy or hold a company’s stock based on what they believe to be hidden political advice in the messages sent to stockholders?
I mean, this company can’t be just trying to drive real wages down to increase profitability, because if they were they’d surely explain their actions to stockholders or potential investors.
Not sure what ax you’re trying to grind here. If management can save on overall labor costs, other things being equal, that’s good news for stockholders.
I never said that investors decide to buy or hold a company’s stock on what you said, now did I? Do you honestly think that stockholder/media messages are solely meant for investors?
Of course driving down labor costs is good news for stockholders. I never said that it wasn’t, now did I?
I never said that investors decide to buy or hold a company’s stock on what you said, now did I? Do you honestly think that stockholder/media messages are solely meant for investors?
Even to the extent that they aren’t, the company’s leaders know full well that they will be read by the investors and will affect them.
I guess that from your point of view, those leaders must be setting their business interests aside in order to spout their personal political views to the world. You must live in a strange reality, if I may borrow Matt’s terminology.
Of course driving down labor costs is good news for stockholders. I never said that it wasn’t, now did I?
As I already said, you didn’t make it clear just what ax you were trying to grind. In any case, if they can lower labor costs, there’s certainly no reason why the leaders would want to minimize that accomplishment in their stockholder communications, and as best as I could fathom your comment, that’s what you were trying to imply.
I can see only one benefit to “Being the vicitm” and this would only work for companies that are largely doing business with the end user. If by “Coming off as the victim” they can get more customers to “Feel sorry for them” and buy their product they in fact might see some benefit over what this “Victim mentality” might have as far as a negative effect on stock holders.
That being said this company is almost solely B2B so that would do them no good. It might work for Apple, Microsoft etc etc, not so much any B2B where the buyers often time are dealing with the same regulations.
You must live in a strange reality, if I may borrow Matt’s terminology.
See, I’m telling ya’ people live in different realities
