Re: Starbucks spends more on health care than coffee....

"Jack Denver" <nunuvyer@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in
news:ksGdnb7osuya0dPZnZ2dnUVZ_tudnZ2d@xxxxxxxxxxx:

"Key man life" is common but it is usually for executive employees
whose loss would hurt the company. Walmart insured the life of the
lowliest clerk - these are known as "dead peasant" policies. They did
this because there was some obscure tax advantage, not because they
really cared (in the business sense) whether the clerk lives or dies.
Many major corporations did the same. Ironically, the tax benefits
did not pan out (Wal-mart ended up suing the insurers that sold them
this plan) and they no longer have these so called "COLI" (corporate
owned life insurance) policies.

It doesn't really affect the insured employees in any way, but it
costs
the government money in lost tax revenue (note however that they
thought this was (thought to be) a totally legal loophole at the time
and there is nothing wrong with using the tax laws to your advantage
to keep as much of your money as you can). But the people who object
to this do so on the grounds that it is "morally wrong" for Walmart
to be "profiting" from the death of its employees and that when the
policies pay off, his heirs should get the money (an argument advanced
by some class action lawyers who wanted to grab a piece of this
money). This is a totally bogus and idiotic argument - these policies
were not purchased for the employee's benefit and if Walmart knew it
had to give the money to the heirs they wouldn't have bought the
policies in the first place. But this is one of Walmart's "crimes"
that are dragged out by the Walmart critic crowd. Most of their other
criticisms of the company are equally lacking in basic economic
understanding, but the kind of people who are Wal-mart critics are not
known for their understanding of how business works. If they really
ran things (and thank goodness they don't) America would be as
prosperous as North Korea or Cuba, where no evil corporations are
permitted to immorally profit from their employees and government
health care is free.


"Ian Smith" <ian@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:slrne4qj33.qgp.ian@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
On 24 Apr 2006, sonofabitchsky@xxxxxxxxxxx <> wrote:

daveb wrote:
Per a "60 Minutes" story 4/22/06.

No wonder they do not have much trouble finding and retaining good
people.

Is it a surprise? I'd expect coffee to be some way down the list of
costs for a coffee shop. Certainly, the staff bill overall would be
expected to be the major item, how that breaks down might be
interesting, but not particularly surprising that coffee costs them
rather less than part of the staff bill.

And they don't take out a life insurance policy on you with
them being the beneficiary like Walmart.

Out of interest, why is this bad? Admittedly, you don't actually say
that it is, but there's an implication that you disaprove of it. If
the company wants to insure against an identified business risk, what
is wrong with it doing so? (My company insures me against death
- with a policy that pays to the company significantly more than they
contract to pay to my estate - I see nothing wrong with this, and
unless you mean to suggest the company would set about assassinating
me to obtain the 'benefit' I can't imagine what anyone else might
think wrong with it.)

regards, Ian SMith
--
|\ /| no .sig
|o o|
|/ \|




A bit of hyperbole is always welcome in A.C. ;)

I understand business & don't believe anyone can justify surreptitiously
insuring someone's life. Should you be able to insure your next door
neighbor's life without their consent? This could lead to actions too
odious to think about. If you wanted to so you could probably get odds in
Vegas on the probabilities of someone's demise. There's a big difference
between gambling on someone dieing & insuring them against death.

Executives are another matter; it is usually part of their employment
agreement. What Wal-Mart did was inexcusable, & while my accountant had
better find every deduction & loophole I'm entitled to, they should have
been prosecuted for fraud instead of just getting an adverse decision from
the IRS.

Robert (a big fan of Wallyworld) Harmon
--
Remove "Z" to reply via email.


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Starbucks spends more on health care than coffee....
    ... "Key man life" is common but it is usually for executive employees whose ... Walmart insured the life of the lowliest ... these so called "COLI" policies. ... your money as you can). ...
    (alt.coffee)
  • Re: Whats up with gym clothing styles?
    ... The cities where WalMart reign supreme also have the lowest pedestrian traffic. ... There are fine and reasonable reasons to choose not to shop at Walmart. ... and good for the economy as well. ... expertise and small-town-way of life are not necessarily good for the consumer who is also a citizen. ...
    (misc.fitness.weights)
  • Re: windows explorer search function
    ... name such as "life ... policies" I find multiple duplicated locations in results such as these ... and in the "In Folder" column in the Search Results there will be ...
    (microsoft.public.windowsxp.help_and_support)
  • Re: Why the lack of set top boxes?
    ... like Mark whose only goal in life is to do his sister, play the banjo, and ... I pointed out that your claims about Walmart ... But when you made the comment above about "whose only goal in life is to do ...
    (alt.tv.tech.hdtv)
  • Re: Whats up with gym clothing styles?
    ... >effects on small town life. ... >WalMart reign supreme also have the lowest pedestrian traffic. ... >> Does basic economics cover the fact that lower prices are good for the ... >Interesting that you named three big box retailers. ...
    (misc.fitness.weights)