3 ms·
the 3 points are an OR, not an AND. you misinterpreted it. altho the legislation as proposed is not final, it was clearly drafted and stated with each of the
by davemc500hats 17y ago
the 3 points are an OR, not an AND. you misinterpreted it.
altho the legislation as proposed is not final, it was clearly drafted and stated with each of the 3 potential rqmts being sufficient on their own, not together.
- tptacek 17y agoIt costs less than $100k per year to keep 5 "full-time" workers on staff. Just pay them minimum wage. This seems well-thought-out to you?
- davemc500hats 17y agoso what's your solution? lower the amount? i think you lose your side of the argument by arguing for any arbitrary amount. i'm happy to argue the merits of what the correct # is, but regardless i think we're just splitting hairs at that point... i've won the discussion. besides, it's a rather ridiculous amount of hassle in both time & money to raise capital from experienced investors in exchange for hatching some supposedly nefarious scheme to -- wait for it -- hire some low-wage workers. really, while i fully admit there may be gaming of the system attempted, this supposed workaround is quite a stretch -- it requires the participation of sophisticated investors willing to risk substantial amounts of capital, reputation, effort, and criminal penalty in order to execute. this doesn't appear to be a rational point worth arguing, you're just being contrarian for the hell of it.