Page 20 of 45 FirstFirst ... 10181920212230 ... LastLast
Results 191 to 200 of 448

Thread: Papa John's CEO: Obamacare likely to raise costs, employee's hours being cut [W:387]

  1. #191
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    United States
    Last Seen
    01-21-16 @ 12:21 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    51,124

    Re: Papa Johns' CEO: Obamacare will increase our costs, reduce employee hours

    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post
    You are so greedy. How can you possibly want to be productive, when others could be getting the same pay for less work?



    but...but....but.... that's mean....
    I guess I'm just a big fat meanie-head.

  2. #192
    Sometimes wrong

    ttwtt78640's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Uhland, Texas
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 09:49 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    34,544

    re: Papa John's CEO: Obamacare likely to raise costs, employee's hours being cut [W:387]

    Quote Originally Posted by VanceMack View Post
    by what logic or 'right' have we decided that employers are responsible for more than giving people a job with a paycheck? By what logic is an employer responsible for an employees healthcare ? Or their family? And for that matter, why the arbitrary 50 employees?
    You dare question the "right" of Obama and his liberal pals in congress to use mandates to make people spend their money "correctly". This was held to be completely Constitutional by the SCOTUS since it is a really just a new fangled method of imposing a "tax". The trick now is for each business is to decide if the "No Obamacare tax" (penalty?) is more expensive than the Obamacare mandate, since both amounts are basically subject to change without notice, and far beyond the employer's control, that is a real mess. Yes he did!
    “The reasonable man adapts himself to the world: the unreasonable one persists to adapt the world to himself.
    Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man.” ― George Bernard Shaw, Man and Superman

  3. #193
    Guru
    JohnWOlin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Kentucky
    Last Seen
    01-17-17 @ 08:15 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    3,594

    re: Papa John's CEO: Obamacare likely to raise costs, employee's hours being cut [W:387]

    Quote Originally Posted by joko104 View Post
    Why should he? Obama gave exemptions to 1200 corporations, including Wal-Mart, whose heirs are worth $20 BILLION (not million) EACH. If THEY can't afford ObamaCare, Papa Johns certainly can't.

    But Papa Johns made the mistake of not buying off the President.

    Hmmm, let's see if you even DARE criticism Obama for exempting 1200 of the wealthiest corporations from ObamaCare?
    Could you provide a link please?
    "We’re going to close the unproductive tax loopholes that allow some of the truly wealthy to avoid paying their fair share. In theory, some of those loopholes were understandable, but in practice they sometimes made it possible for millionaires to pay nothing, while a bus driver was paying ten percent of his salary, and that’s crazy." -Reagan

  4. #194
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    United States
    Last Seen
    01-21-16 @ 12:21 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    51,124

    re: Papa John's CEO: Obamacare likely to raise costs, employee's hours being cut [W:387]

    Quote Originally Posted by JohnWOlin View Post
    Could you provide a link please?

    ..........

  5. #195
    Global Moderator
    Moderator

    Gina's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:47 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    31,850

    Re: Papa Johns' CEO: Obamacare will increase our costs, reduce employee hours

    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post
    Because if there is any third-party payer who is going to be a worse stand-in for the individual purchaser than an employer, it's the government.

    I have government health insurance. It sucks. Oh, it has limitless coverage, I'm sure. If I get really expensive cancer, it will pay for all the third-rate care I can possibly handle. But it's also a bureaucratic nightmare. It took me two years to convince those people that the woman on my marriage certificate who was also listed as the mother of my child was, in fact, my wife. In the meantime, I was trying to dodge thousands and thousands of dollars of bills from having a child which they were obligated to pay for, but refused to do so.

    Her father was a retiree, you see... so she had already had TriCare as a secondary.... and once you are already in the system, I mean, you're in the system so, I mean, why would you change... I mean, it's not like you can be both one persons daughter and another persons wife... I mean.... she's already in the system.... you see..... so.....

    THEN they accused me of fraud and threatened me because the hospital had originally billed them for a "Baby Smith" (my last name isn't smith, but I'm using it as a stand-in), and I was trying to claim a child whose first name was not "Baby". You see, "Baby" was already in the system... sooooo...... [/rant].

    Where I live, I'm only allowed to use a single hospital, which is about 40 minutes away. If I want to use closer facilities, there is one, but it's for non-emergency healthcare only. So I have to go down to the hospital, get my primary switched over to the closer facility which cannot actually provide anything close to a full range of healthcare, then drive back up to the closer facility, then get the healthcare, then drive back down to the hospital and get it switched back so if there is an emergency or I need healthcare after 1600 or on a weekend I can still get a someone to stitch me back up.

    The Hospital is not exactly state of the art. We had a friend have a baby there last July - she got a nice cot, the husband got a stool. There was no air conditioning. We live on a tropical island. Imagine having your child (and then trying to rest afterwards) in 90 degree heat with 100% humidity.



    For businesses that is correct. Ditto for the fact that we compete with other nations who burden their companies with a lower corporate tax rate. Less so for the individuals who bear a higher tax burden to pay for an inefficient healthcare system.



    no flame retardation necessary. You are absolutely right that we need to move away from employer-provided health insurance. We just need to move to an actual insurance model of individually purchased health insurance, just like we do for auto, house, and life insurance.
    I haven't seen that reasoning discussed. I think single payer, extending Medicare, would be a better plan than the ACA. Our employers should not be burdened with carrying insurance for us.

    I'm sorry your insurance sucks, but that is not the case for Medicare nor the insurance the congress and I think most other federal employees receive. It can be done better, that is for sure.

    How, could insurance companies offer affordable individual polices?

  6. #196
    Engineer

    RabidAlpaca's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    American in Europe
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:18 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    14,553

    re: Papa John's CEO: Obamacare likely to raise costs, employee's hours being cut [W:387]

    Quote Originally Posted by AliHajiSheik View Post
    So since these individuals committed fraud, how come they were never charged? It's not like fraud was legal back then.
    Uh, because it's not fraud? Being a complete dickhead isn't illegal, it's just horrible, horrible, horrible banking practices.

    Quote Originally Posted by Grant View Post
    It was the government who not only encouraged banks to lend mortgages to those who couldn't afford them, they actually passed laws forcing banks to lend money to people who would not otherwise be eligible for them through the traditional means. In fact Barrack Obama, during his 'community organizing' days, was one of those who brought a class action suit against City Bank (I believe it was) for not allowing sufficient mortgages to minority applicants. Again, it was the government's attempts at social engineering that was the source of the problem, and there will naturally more of that on the way.
    If you'll remember, the crash happened before obama even took office.

    CDS's and subprime lending were pumping up the housing bubble for many, many years, this wasn't something that happened overnight.

    Though yes, legislation like this that obama is pushing to force subprime lending is leading us right back down the same road and dampening our recovery.

    Some people refuse to learn from history.
    Quote Originally Posted by LowDown View Post
    I've got to say that it is shadenfreudalicious to see the rich and famous fucquewads on the coast suffering from the fires.

  7. #197
    Sage
    cpwill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    USofA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:35 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    57,067

    Re: Papa Johns' CEO: Obamacare will increase our costs, reduce employee hours

    Quote Originally Posted by Gina View Post
    I haven't seen that reasoning discussed. I think single payer, extending Medicare, would be a better plan than the ACA
    So long as we are willing to accept a poorer future in which our elderly lack access to healthcare, yes. There is a reason that every single-payer program comes along with a bureaucracy whose job it is to decide when people are no longer cost-effective.

    Our employers should not be burdened with carrying insurance for us.
    Medicare is currently slated to go bankrupt in 12 years. How in the world is adding hundreds of millions of people to its' rolls likely to improve that?

    I'm sorry your insurance sucks, but that is not the case for Medicare nor the insurance the congress and I think most other federal employees receive. It can be done better, that is for sure.
    Again, Medicare is about to go bankrupt, and take Social Security and the rest of the Federal government with it. It is not a model we want to build on.

    How, could insurance companies offer affordable individual polices?
    I'm glad you asked.

    The short answer is - the same way that the automobile insurance companies do. Think about it - your car insurance doesn't pay for you to fill up your gas tank. It doesn't pay for your oil changes. If it did pay for these things - would you really care what the price of gas was? Would you get the economy gas when you could get the "Chevron Silver" for 10 cents more and (according to the cartoon on the pump) help clean your engine? You would, and you wouldn't care about the cost, because you aren't paying for it. But auto insurance doesn't operate like that - it's insurance. It pays for when something unexpected and/or catastrophic happens - when you get into an accident. That's what insurance is, that's how it is supposed to function. But for some reason we expect our health insurance to pay for the equivalent of tanks of gas and oil changes. And so people don't care how much the extra shot costs, they don't really care if the test is redundant, and sure, supersize my hospital room as much as my insurance company will pay for.

    We don't allow people to make price conscious decisions with healthcare, and that is why health insurance is so expensive. Because none of us make price conscious decisions, all of us cost more, and so the price of insuring us rises.

    High-deductible, catastrophic care health insurance is A) affordable and B) actually insurance. It has the additional virtue of causing people to make most medical decisions (which are neither catastrophic nor emergency) in a price-conscious manner, while at the same time making sure that if little johnny get's a broken arm, or your spouse get's cancer, that you are covered. When paired with Health Savings Accounts, which allow you to pay for regular maintenance-style healthcare with pre-tax dollars, the system can work very well indeed.

    These aren't individual experience (except for the last one), but when we look at the reform efforts that have sought to put price-consciousness back into play, we see that they have been very successful:


    Indiana offered HSA's, which have patients save money in tax-free accounts (where it grows and remains theirs forever and ever unless theys pend it) matched with high deductible plans to it's employees. Employees began to respond to price signals, and medical costs per patient were reduced by 33% and expenditures to the state were reduced by 11%.

    Safeway has instituted a program that gave financial incentives to people who engaged in healthy behavior by allowing price signals in the insurance side of the market to work (Indiana worked on the medical side), and saw it's per-captia health care costs remain flat from 2005-2009; when most companies saw theirs jump by 38%.

    Whole Foods instituted HSA's, and let's the employees choose what they want the company to fund. This institutes price pressure on the medical side (WF covers the high-deductible plan 100%), and their CEO points out that as a result Whole Foods' per-capita costs are much lower than typical insurance programs, while maintaining employee satisfaction.

    Medicare Part D utilized price pressure on the insurance side, and saw expenditures come in at 40% UNDER the original estimates - the only such government program in history to do so.

    Wendy's instituted HSA's, and saw the number of their employees who got preventative and annual checkup care climb even as they saw claims decrease by 14% (in one year).

    Wal-Mart's low cost clinics and prescriptions save us oodles of cash. Wal-Mart reports that "half of their clinic patients report that they are uninsured" and that "if it were not for [Wal-Marts'] clinics they would haven't gotten care - or they would have gone to an emergency room". Walmart - reducing costs and expenditures.

    Dr Robert Berry runs a practice called PATMOS (payment at time of service). he doesn't take insurance at all - but simply posts the prices of his services. By removing the cost of dealing with mutliple insurance agencies, medicare, and medicaid, the prices he is able to list are one half to ONE THIRD of standard.
    Last edited by cpwill; 11-12-12 at 05:33 AM.

  8. #198
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    The anals of history
    Last Seen
    07-25-15 @ 02:05 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    10,348

    re: Papa John's CEO: Obamacare likely to raise costs, employee's hours being cut [W:387]

    Is it bad to be wealthy?

    Quote Originally Posted by JohnWOlin View Post
    because hey, they can offer a million free pizzas for a promotion and the CEO has a ****ing moat around his mansion but he'll be godddamned if he has to help his employees out.

  9. #199
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Tampa
    Last Seen
    09-24-13 @ 11:55 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    1,526

    re: Papa John's CEO: Obamacare likely to raise costs, employee's hours being cut [W:387]

    Quote Originally Posted by Peter Grimm View Post
    Is it bad to be wealthy?
    no, but it's bad to pay congresspeople* to give you tax breaks when you're already swimming in money.

  10. #200
    Sage
    cpwill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    USofA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:35 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    57,067

    re: Papa John's CEO: Obamacare likely to raise costs, employee's hours being cut [W:387]

    Quote Originally Posted by Peter Grimm View Post
    Is it bad to be wealthy?
    Of course it is. To be productive means that you are greedy. Also, promotions are not about advertising.

Page 20 of 45 FirstFirst ... 10181920212230 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •