|
|
|
|
|
by napierzaza
5793 days ago
|
|
But what's the argument? That there are taxes or overhead? The truth is that you're not hiring for charity in the first place. So if the true cost (burdened cost) of a new employee doesn't make you more than enough money to cover that, don't hire. Just because the cost of an employee is not the "sticker" price, and is somehow more complicated, doesn't mean that you're being punished to hire people. |
|
1) On the first day/week/month, the employee is probably not going to contribute much, and in general you are taking a risk. The lower the sticker price on that risk, the more people are likely to take it.
2) If your business is making 250K and spending 240K on employing 4 employees @ 60K each and you want to stay net positive, you need to wait until you reach 300K before you hire the next person[1]. So there are these gaps in ramping up a business which can only be overcome with growth. When salaries are lower, these gaps are smaller. Looking at the broader labor market and assuming growth, lower taxes would mean smaller gaps and potentially less unemployment.
[1] Note that because of their opportunity costs, its harder to hire professionals for part-time.