Even if you take out $75 for the GF subsidy (being generous and assuming she gets an equal share), each guy made $25/hour, cash (i.e. ~$30-$35/hour pre-tax), which is >3x what they'd get at a fast-food joint.
Now of course, one does need to take into account the fact that they're restricted in spending their loot on beer, which they are obligated to share. From a short-term economic standpoint this is probably a significant hit on their profits (i.e. unlikely that the three gentlemen will consume the majority of the beer). However, from a longer-term/more holistic view, purchasing beer for the group will surely lead to fun, team building, general goodwill, and so on, which is arguably more valuable than the $300 cash at this point in the startup's lifecycle.
tl;dr startups should use aeron-chair arbitrage to fund investment in beer, it's science.
Wouldn't the $25/hour still be taxable? (I understand that nobody pays taxes on small cash amounts, but if we're considering its viability as a business it seems unfair to compare one option with tax evasion and one without.)
Even if you take out $75 for the GF subsidy (being generous and assuming she gets an equal share), each guy made $25/hour, cash (i.e. ~$30-$35/hour pre-tax), which is >3x what they'd get at a fast-food joint.
Now of course, one does need to take into account the fact that they're restricted in spending their loot on beer, which they are obligated to share. From a short-term economic standpoint this is probably a significant hit on their profits (i.e. unlikely that the three gentlemen will consume the majority of the beer). However, from a longer-term/more holistic view, purchasing beer for the group will surely lead to fun, team building, general goodwill, and so on, which is arguably more valuable than the $300 cash at this point in the startup's lifecycle.
tl;dr startups should use aeron-chair arbitrage to fund investment in beer, it's science.