647
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] Mistic@lemmy.world 16 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

Let's assess the effects this change could cause on real numbers.

Note: This is a duplicate of a part of a comment I've written here above as a response, but I don't want it to be buried. Hope that's fine

I'll take Nutrien's 2023 audited financial statement as an example. (Numbers in brackets are what's deducted to get what's not in brackets)

  • Sales - 29056
  • Freight, transportation, distribution - (974)
  • Cost of goods sold - (19608)
  • EBIT - 8474
  • Interest - (w/e)
  • EBT - 1952
  • Taxes - (670)
  • Net earning - 1282

Out of cost of goods sold (2858) is cost of labour, let's also add (626) from general administrative expenses, and just say it's all wages.

  • Effective tax rate - 670/1952*100% = 34,3% (wow, that's a lot for where I live, also ignoring mining tax for simplicity)

Let's see what happens to our efficiency if the changes take effect.

All of costs can be divided into Fixed and Variable ones. Labour, in this case, is Variable because we can manipulate it by employing more staff to compensate for reduction in working hours and keep the sales at the same rate. (Contract workers are usually Fixed Cost, but it's all relative, as no Fixed Cost is ever truly fixed.)

Going from 40 => 32, we have a 20% reduction in working hours. Mind you, this doesn't mean there will be a 20% hit to productivity. It may be more, it may be less (most likely less), for simplicity let's say it's 20%. So, we need 20% more workers to compensate. (2858+626)*120%=4180.8

  • New EBT = 1952 + 2858 + 626 - 4180.8 = 1255.2
  • New net profit = 1255.2*(1-34.3%) = 824.7. Mind you, the effective tax rate will probably be lower if employment affects deductibles and/or grants tax privileges.

So, our net profit margin went from 1282/29056 = 4.4% to 2.8%. Looks bad at first glance, but it's also a bad year. A year prior net profit margin was at whopping 20.3%, so a decrease from 4.4% to 2.8% would be nothing in comparison.

Will it result in increased prices? Yes, but it will also lead to economic growth, because more free time = people spend more money = companies earn more = companies grow faster, but so does inflation. If they can manage the inflation, I don't see why this couldn't be possible.

[-] Nevoic@lemm.ee 11 points 8 months ago

Reducing net profit doesn't have any impact on pricing in capitalist markets. It's not like capitalists have some specific profit percentage they are allowed to hit (unless they're in a very regulated industry like grid or water supply). They want infinite returns, and they'll increase prices as much as the market allows to generate more profits.

Capitalists don't look at a net profit of 4.4% and say "yup that's enough", but if it were 2.8% they'd say "damn guess we have to increase prices for customers, I really wish we didn't have to do this".

They might increase prices as a retaliatory measure. The same way businesses slashed hours as a result of Obamacare. They didn't have to, but it benefited them to, and they didn't see a downside.

They might be able to increase prices, blame it on this law, and have people who are aligned politically with them put up with it and maybe even support their business more to "stick it to the libs". They already do this with things like inflation, blaming it on Biden and then increasing prices far more than necessary.

[-] Mistic@lemmy.world 1 points 7 months ago

Oh, yeah, absolutely. Price policy is a whole different topic. Only monopolies can afford to increase them just because they're not meeting the expected quota.

Don't know about "retaliatory measure", it's hard to imagine companies uniting like that over it. Usually, they just play by the rules, and those could be the new rules (strong emphasis on "usually"). In fact, if the management is competent, it's likely that they have already accounted for it, just in case, after the news dropped.

[-] OneWomanCreamTeam@sh.itjust.works 1 points 7 months ago

They don't all need to band together. They just need a few big ones to do it, then everyone else will just jump on the bandwagon.

this post was submitted on 14 Mar 2024
647 points (98.4% liked)

politics

19072 readers
3806 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS