begin quoting David Brown as of Mon, Jan 07, 2008 at 02:30:01PM -0800: > On Mon, Jan 07, 2008 at 02:17:39PM -0800, John Oliver wrote: > > >Right. But it isn't "free"... there's a cost associated with running a > >cafeteria. The amount paid for the food almost certainly does not equal > >that figure. The remainder is paid by the company. Perhaps an argument > >could be made that the amount of that subsidy would be paid to employees > >in their checks if there was no cafeteria. Or we could say that the > >company is providing that amount out of profits,a nd the shareholders > >are willing to see a slightly lower return in order to provide that > >benefit. Either way, the cost *is* being paid. > > I think they're at the point in their corporation where cafeteria benefits > are just a tiny amount of noise. The have a lot of other "benefits". They > have shuttles to take people to and from work, provide oil changes, > haircuts, massage, dry-cleaning, etc. The shareholders are far from > complaining about anything, especially at $648 a share!
Which means that the results are worth the price. :) If all you look at is cost, you never see the value. -- They say I can't see the forest for the trees But the real problem is all the buzzing bees! Stewart Stremler -- [email protected] http://www.kernel-panic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kplug-list
