« | »

Gallup: Healthcare, Regulations Hurt Hiring

A random act of polling from Gallup:

Health Costs, Gov’t Regulations Curb Small Business Hiring

Nearly half of small-business owners name these issues

by Dennis Jacobe, Chief Economist
February 15, 2012

PRINCETON, NJ — U.S. small-business owners who aren’t hiring — 85% of those surveyed — are most likely to say the reasons they are not doing so include not needing additional employees; worries about weak business conditions, including revenues; cash flow; and the overall U.S. economy.

Additionally, nearly half of small-business owners point to potential healthcare costs (48%) and government regulations (46%) as reasons. One in four are not hiring because they worry they may not be in business in 12 months.

Companies typically hold back on hiring when the economy is weak and when their operating environment is not providing sufficient revenues or cash flows. This appears to be the case right now, as the economy has been weak for more than four years. Less typical is for many owners to point to such things as potential healthcare costs and government regulations

[M]any small businesses continue to feel financially vulnerable, with 66% saying they are worried about the current status of the U.S. economy and nearly one in four telling Gallup they fear they may not be in business 12 months from now.

Given this difficult operating environment, it is not surprising that many small-business owners also worry about potential new healthcare costs and government regulations. While small businesses are always finding ways to deal with their changing operating environment, including government regulations and healthcare, these added challenges can be seen as exacerbating an already uncertain and difficult situation. In turn, they become additional reasons to hold back on hiring

Not to mention that they are unpatriotic.

Still, isn’t this quite a switch? Haven’t we been told up until now that businesses are just sitting on their money because they are greedy? And they want to sabotage our young President?

This article was posted by Steve on Thursday, February 16th, 2012. Comments are currently closed.

6 Responses to “Gallup: Healthcare, Regulations Hurt Hiring”

  1. GetBackJack says:

    In the early 1980s (some of you will remember) the corporate mantra was “Our employees are our greatest strength”

    Then the federal government began using the term Worker to describe federal employees and that term crept into Government Bids and other documents submitted to the Federal Apparatus (kind of a monkey-see monkey-do thing)

    THEN, the federal government began piling responsibilities for employees health, retirement, babysitting, hand holding, etc … onto the Employer in an attempt to shed the weight of social responsibility onto Business and away from the simpleton average voter (read street thug democrat)

    30+ years later and the system of assigning responsibility is so strained and burdened, it’d be a cold day in Hell before I would hire a “worker” and thus assume all of his debts, responsibilities, his extended family and breast implant demands.

    No effing way.

  2. canary says:

    Can someone explain to me why an employer would tell it’s employee the government likes it when they hire employees only part time? A situation where many employees only work 1 day week? (some employee actually say they like working once a week to get store discount offered to employee?

    • tranquil.night says:

      Canary, I cannot assert the correlation for sure, but I’d put money that policies similar to the 2010 HIRE Act – tax breaks for hiring the unemployed – are spurring this. The business side of it is obviously that your obligations are less employing part-time, but usually they try to maximize those employees. Minimal hours like that suggests to me that they don’t actually have the work but some incentive is actually making it minimally costly to employ them.

      From CNN Money, 9/6/11: http://money.cnn.com/2011/09/06/news/economy/hiring_tax_credit/index.htm

      A temporary tax credit of a few thousand bucks usually is not enough incentive to bring on a new worker, who costs tens of thousands of dollars in salary and benefits.

      Also, in order to prevent companies from gaming the system, these credits often come with many restrictions and paperwork requirements, which further diminish their allure, said Patrick O’Keefe, director of economic research for J.H. Cohn, an accounting firm.

      The concern is that businesses will get credits for hires they were going to make anyway, even without the government subsidy.

      “The prospects for success are quite limited,” O’Keefe said.

      One of the main problems with the credit is that it doesn’t address a key problem facing companies today: A lack of demand for their products and services, experts said. Without a boost in business, employers aren’t likely to add to their payrolls.

      “They just don’t have as much work for employees to do,” he said. “They don’t have customers coming in the door. They don’t have contracts to fill.”

      Tax manipulation probably more geared to help mask the real economic malaise and un/underemployment.

    • canary says:

      tranquilnight, Thanks. Probably, why they don’t give even nickel raises.

      You have reminded me of Obama’s 40% paying businesses for hiring felons crime in the last 6 months rule having more priority than a business hiring a Iraq disabled Vet who has to go without work for 4 months.

      So, the job isn’t breaking any laws in hiring adult felon prostitutes who have minor aged co-workers over for sleep overs. It’s a civil matter.

    • canary says:

      oops. I meant to say the business having no problem hiring a male pimp who actively runs a prostitution
      business. Been moving the furniture against the doors at night along with other keep safe measures having stumbled upon this. lol. not.

  3. Astravogel says:

    Thomas Sowell (the Tom) had a collum last week around
    Tuesday (he acts White) about the minimum wage and how
    it killed employment for young black folks (it’s the Man keeping
    us down) around 1948 or so. Interesting read.
    I recall my one unfortunate interaction with government-assisted
    renters, who trashed our place, stole, and welcomed her husband
    back home from the grey walls hotel with a monumental beer-bust
    for he and all his ilk. I complained to the agent, who in essence said
    it was my tough luck, and would I like another renter?

« Front Page | To Top
« | »