Page 32 of 45 FirstFirst ... 22303132333442 ... LastLast
Results 311 to 320 of 448

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

  1. #311
    Sage
    AdamT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Last Seen
    02-13-13 @ 04:09 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    17,773

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

    Quote Originally Posted by VanceMack View Post
    Recycling recently used comments is the weakest form of retort. I would say I expect better of you...but...I dont. Its so...you...
    Au contraire -- mocking your silly posts never gets old.
    "The necessaries of life occasion the great expense of the poor. They find it difficult to get food, and the greater part of their little revenue is spent in getting it. The luxuries and vanities of life occasion the principal expense of the rich, and a magnificent house embellishes and sets off to the best advantage all the other luxuries and vanities which they possess. ... It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion."

    -- Adam Smith

  2. #312
    Sage
    VanceMack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 06:41 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    54,705

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

    Quote Originally Posted by AdamT View Post
    Au contraire -- mocking your silly posts never gets old.
    That you think your are mocking anyone but your own self is laughable. Now...

    Do YOU believe every employer is responsible for the health care needs of their employees? And their families? And does that include mom and pop small businesses? By what logic do you come to your conclusion that an employer is responsible for anything more than providing a paycheck for service rendered?

  3. #313
    Sage
    VanceMack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 06:41 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    54,705

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Paschendale View Post
    Maybe I missed this somewhere, but what provisions in Obamacare are actually going to increase the cost for Papa John's to do business? I thought the main provisions of the law were that insurance companies can't drop people when they need care, no discrimination over pre-existing conditions, and that everyone is mandated to purchase health insurance. Are businesses required to provide health benefits when they weren't previously? Why weren't they doing that previously, since work benefits are the only way most people can afford health insurance? The whole point of business provided health insurance was to get a discount for bulk purchases. If businesses aren't up to the task of being providers of health insurance, we really should just decouple them from it.
    "Under the Affordable Care Act, full-time employees — those working 30 hours or more per week — would have to be provided with insurance at companies with more than 50 workers."

  4. #314
    Sage
    AdamT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Last Seen
    02-13-13 @ 04:09 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    17,773

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

    Quote Originally Posted by VanceMack View Post
    That you think your are mocking anyone but your own self is laughable. Now...

    Do YOU believe every employer is responsible for the health care needs of their employees? And their families? And does that include mom and pop small businesses? By what logic do you come to your conclusion that an employer is responsible for anything more than providing a paycheck for service rendered?
    The system we have chosen is one of employer-provided health insurance. That's not debatable. The system we *should* have, IMO, is single payer, universal coverage.

    Given the system we DO have, I find Schnatter's actions (or suggested actions) despicable. His employees are the backbone of his company and they have made him very very rich. He can easily afford to provide them full time jobs and health care, but he has elected to shaft them instead. This is the same guy who gave away a free pizza to every Camaro owner in the country, because he sold a Camaro to start his business. He since bought back that Camaro for $250,000 and enshrined it in his headquarters. So basically, it's perfectly okay to throw away money to stroke his own ego, but he won't bump the cost of a pie by a nickel to provide his employees with health insurance. Pig.
    "The necessaries of life occasion the great expense of the poor. They find it difficult to get food, and the greater part of their little revenue is spent in getting it. The luxuries and vanities of life occasion the principal expense of the rich, and a magnificent house embellishes and sets off to the best advantage all the other luxuries and vanities which they possess. ... It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion."

    -- Adam Smith

  5. #315
    Sage
    VanceMack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 06:41 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    54,705

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

    Quote Originally Posted by AdamT View Post
    The system we have chosen is one of employer-provided health insurance. That's not debatable. The system we *should* have, IMO, is single payer, universal coverage.

    Given the system we DO have, I find Schnatter's actions (or suggested actions) despicable. His employees are the backbone of his company and they have made him very very rich. He can easily afford to provide them full time jobs and health care, but he has elected to shaft them instead. This is the same guy who gave away a free pizza to every Camaro owner in the country, because he sold a Camaro to start his business. He since bought back that Camaro for $250,000 and enshrined it in his headquarters. So basically, it's perfectly okay to throw away money to stroke his own ego, but he won't bump the cost of a pie by a nickel to provide his employees with health insurance. Pig.
    Im sorry...the 'system we have chosen"? Who is 'we'? Certainly not the businessmen that have created those successful businesses. So I ask again...by what right...what constitutional statute...what principle do you or anyone else believe you can throw the responsibility for Americas healthcare on business owners? And why only on the 'very' successful? Do you also expect that burden to be applied to say...franchise owners that employ 49 people? Small business owners that only employ...say...15? If not WHY not?

    Perhaps they should have passed a universal healthcare program. I have always been in support of a states right to pass healthcare reform ala the Massachusetts Health Care act. But they didnt. They voted for legislation many admit they didnt bother to read, that most still dont know what is contained and without regard to whether or not it was the 'right' thing to do.

    An employer is not your mommy. How ****ing pathetic is it that so many are looking for one...even as adults. An employer offers a job. They provide salary. IF they choose they can offer a benefit package with some form of healthcare...but only IF they choose. Their primary responsibility is to provide you a paycheck based on the conditions of your employment. Nothing less...but nothing more.

  6. #316
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Theoretical Physics Lab
    Last Seen
    01-06-15 @ 11:06 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    25,120

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

    Quote Originally Posted by AdamT
    The system we have chosen is one of employer-provided health insurance. That's not debatable. The system we *should* have, IMO, is single payer, universal coverage.
    Personal opinion.

    Given the system we DO have, I find Schnatter's actions (or suggested actions) despicable. His employees are the backbone of his company and they have made him very very rich.
    Ah, the socialist argument. Are workers investing startup capital? Do they have the concept for a product in demand? Are they paying for marketing/advertisement, business structure, overhead, etc.? Or are they just bringing nothing to the table other than unskilled labor? I love it when people don't understand the most fundamental concepts of supply and demand.

    He can easily afford to provide them full time jobs and health care, but he has elected to shaft them instead.
    Yeah, yeah, the profit model is busted. As a lawyer, you could probably afford to perform 80% of your work pro bono. Do you?

    This is the same guy who gave away a free pizza to every Camaro owner in the country, because he sold a Camaro to start his business. He since bought back that Camaro for $250,000 and enshrined it in his headquarters.
    Why does what he does with his own assets matter to you one inch? Welcome to America - the land where nobody minds their own business.

  7. #317
    Sage
    AdamT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Last Seen
    02-13-13 @ 04:09 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    17,773

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

    Quote Originally Posted by VanceMack View Post
    Im sorry...the 'system we have chosen"? Who is 'we'? Certainly not the businessmen that have created those successful businesses.
    "We" is the American people, when they elected Obama on the promise of health care reform, and then reelected him, in part in rejection of calls to repeal ACA. Certainly many many businesses have for years been more than happy to accept what is the single largest deduction in our tax code: the employer health insurance deduction. That deduction has been a massive transfer of wealth to businesses who, in effect, receive a government subsidy for their payrolls.

    So I ask again...by what right...what constitutional statute...what principle do you or anyone else believe you can throw the responsibility for Americas healthcare on business owners? And why only on the 'very' successful? Do you also expect that burden to be applied to say...franchise owners that employ 49 people? Small business owners that only employ...say...15? If not WHY not?
    Again, it is not the system that I would advocate. But if you're trying to argue that it burdens businesses, you are mistaken. For years it has been a huge boon to businesses because they can deduct what is in effect a element of their payroll. The larger the business the bigger the benefit, because larger businesses can negotiate better prices, which gives them a competitive advantage over smaller businesses and especially over independent contractors who cannot deduct insurance costs in most cases and who pay higher individual rates. In this sense ACA will help smaller businesses compete on a more even playing field because they can take advantage of lower prices through insurance exchanges. Large businesses like Popa Johns won't suffer because the law applies equally to their large competitors. That is unless, of course, someone like Schnatter tries to game the system by doing away with full time employment. Whether such a gambit will work remains to be seen.

    Perhaps they should have passed a universal healthcare program. I have always been in support of a states right to pass healthcare reform ala the Massachusetts Health Care act. But they didnt. They voted for legislation many admit they didnt bother to read, that most still dont know what is contained and without regard to whether or not it was the 'right' thing to do.
    Universal single payer is a better system, but it was not a politically viable option. We have, and had had for decades, an employer based system. The only practical way to expand coverage was to work within the existing framework.

    An employer is not your mommy. How ****ing pathetic is it that so many are looking for one...even as adults. An employer offers a job. They provide salary. IF they choose they can offer a benefit package with some form of healthcare...but only IF they choose. Their primary responsibility is to provide you a paycheck based on the conditions of your employment. Nothing less...but nothing more.
    This is just silliness.
    Last edited by AdamT; 11-19-12 at 04:15 PM.
    "The necessaries of life occasion the great expense of the poor. They find it difficult to get food, and the greater part of their little revenue is spent in getting it. The luxuries and vanities of life occasion the principal expense of the rich, and a magnificent house embellishes and sets off to the best advantage all the other luxuries and vanities which they possess. ... It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion."

    -- Adam Smith

  8. #318
    Sage
    VanceMack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 06:41 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    54,705

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

    Quote Originally Posted by AdamT View Post
    "We" is the American people, when they elected Obama on the promise of health care reform, and then reelected him, in part in rejection of calls to repeal ACA. Certainly many many businesses have for years been more than happy to accept what is the single largest deduction in our tax code: the employer health insurance deduction. That deduction has been a massive transfer of wealth to businesses who, in effect, receive a government subsidy for their payrolls.
    Again, it is not the system that I would advocate. But if you're trying to argue that it burdens businesses, you are mistaken. For years it has been a huge boon to businesses because they can deduct what is in effect a element of their payroll. The larger the business the bigger the benefit, because larger businesses can negotiate better prices, which gives them a competitive advantage over smaller businesses and especially over independent contractors who cannot deduct insurance costs in most cases and who pay higher individual rates. In this sense ACA will help smaller businesses compete on a more even playing field because they can take advantage of lower prices through insurance exchanges. Large businesses like Popa Johns won't suffer because the law applies equally to their large competitors. That is unless, of course, someone like Schnatter tries to game the system by doing away with full time employment. Whether such a gambit will work remains to be seen.
    Universal single payer is a better system, but it was not a politically viable option. We have, and had had for decades, an employer based system. The only practical way to expand coverage was to work within the existing framework.
    This is just silliness.
    Its not silliness...its pathetic. Mommy wont take care of you as an adult, so stick that burden on a business owner. But not every business owner...just the very successful ones. No business should have to 'game the system' because the system should not be forcing the care of grown ass men and women on others.

    So...is that a 'no' re forcing the small business employer to provide for THEIR employees? That seems rather arbitrary and unfair, doesnt it? Why would you force someone to actually pay for their own healthcare just because they have the misfortune of working for...say...a roofing contractor with 12 employees?

  9. #319
    Uncanny
    Paschendale's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    New York City
    Last Seen
    03-31-16 @ 04:08 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Socialist
    Posts
    12,510

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

    Quote Originally Posted by VanceMack View Post
    "Under the Affordable Care Act, full-time employees — those working 30 hours or more per week — would have to be provided with insurance at companies with more than 50 workers."
    All the more reason why we should decouple employment from insurance. We already knew that widespread coverage brings down costs. It's time for universal healthcare.
    Liberté. Égalité. Fraternité.

  10. #320
    Sage
    VanceMack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 06:41 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    54,705

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Paschendale View Post
    All the more reason why we should decouple employment from insurance. We already knew that widespread coverage brings down costs. It's time for universal healthcare.
    I think every state ought to consider Universal Healthcare and if their citizens want it, they should pass it and fund it accordingly. I absolutely agree.

Page 32 of 45 FirstFirst ... 22303132333442 ... 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
  •