CEO threatens to fire employees if obama re-elected

That great behavior on the right you were citing in the other thread, eh?

 

Must be scab workers. They were/are to smart and to hard working to need a union. No sympathy from me.

 

I expect more joblessness on the homefront no matter who sits in the WH. We can't have free trade, globalization, huge banker bailouts, and jobs too.

 

Yea I am sure they were hoping for your sympathy.

 

If Obama is re-elected it means that Obamacare will go into full operational mode ion 2014. i expect a lot of small business will make sure they have less than 50 employees to avoid having to provide health insurance. I believe that the threat of Obamacare has been one thing that has kept small business from hiring!

 

MagneticPoles, Billwald- Please explain why he should remain in business if he is not satisfied with the return he receives from his investment.

I cannot blame him one bit. Who is John Galt?

 

I saw no threat in that letter. I saw reasoned analysis of a situation of which a thoughtful employer wished to inform his employees.

 

I've never removed a parasite that didn't leave a scab. The scab meant the wound inflicted by the disease-ridden, free-loading parasite was healing.

 

>MagneticPoles, Billwald- Please explain why he should remain in business if he is not satisfied with the return he receives from his investment.

Republicans claim most jobs are generated by small businesses but 75% of new businesses fail within 5 years. It isn't the business owners who pay for their bankruptcy but their creditors who pass the cost on to the working class in higher prices.

 

Agreed.


He probably won't be paid to not layoff people in order to spare Obama more embarrassment.

 

Of course costs, regardless of their nature, are generally passed on to the consumer. If they were not, capitalism wouldn't work. The consumer has the ability to choose to either pay the price or go elsewhere or go without.

My question wasn't about who should bear the ultimate responsibility for bankrupt businesses. My question is about your reasoning that a person who owns a company should be forced to stay in business (not a bankrupt one) against his will.