Page 33 of 45 FirstFirst ... 23313233343543 ... LastLast
Results 321 to 330 of 448

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

  1. #321
    Sage
    Boo Radley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Last Seen
    11-22-17 @ 04:22 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    36,858

    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 wish more could see that.

    AUSTAN GOOLSBEE: I think the world vests too much power, certainly in the president, probably in Washington in general for its influence on the economy, because most all of the economy has nothing to do with the government.

  2. #322
    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 Paschendale
    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.
    Widespread coverage that includes blanket policies for those who would be excluded based on cost...brings that cost down?


  3. #323
    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
    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.
    The trouble with that, of course, is that the world and American views on healthcare are evolving. More and more, it's being considered a civil right. Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness kinda has to include health, otherwise you die, your liberties are reduced to just being on paper, and you can't pursue much happiness. Civil rights are really not an issue to be different between states. But, in general, Americans favor universal healthcare. If it were put to a straight popular vote, it would win easily. So, I think the mandate is there. Splitting it up by state just seems impractical.

    Quote Originally Posted by Gipper View Post
    Widespread coverage that includes blanket policies for those who would be excluded based on cost...brings that cost down?
    As a country, we have decided that no one should be excluded "based on cost". That's a very euphemistic term for insurance companies refusing to pay out when their services are actually called upon, by the way. Every person should be covered. Your assertion about blanket policies is also weird. Your point is to impugn a "one size fits all" approach, I assume. But covering everything... that really does fit all. And it can rein in the excesses of the medical industry. So yes, costs go down. Even if we stop refusing to treat people because they're actually sick.
    Liberté. Égalité. Fraternité.

  4. #324
    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 Gipper View Post
    Widespread coverage that includes blanket policies for those who would be excluded based on cost...brings that cost down?

    Yes, it does, because those who can't get coverage can still get emergency treatment, which is the most expensive kind. Hospitals jack up their rates to cover those costs, which results in increased premiums.
    "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. #325
    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
    Yes, it does, because those who can't get coverage can still get emergency treatment, which is the most expensive kind. Hospitals jack up their rates to cover those costs, which results in increased premiums.
    Wait a minute, wait a minute...are you guys talking about changing hospitals from for-profit to non-profit? Socializing that too?

    Son of a bitch...

  6. #326
    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 Gipper View Post
    Wait a minute, wait a minute...are you guys talking about changing hospitals from for-profit to non-profit? Socializing that too?

    Son of a bitch...
    No. We're talking about the Reagan-era legislation that made it impossible for ANY hospital ER to turn away patients because they don't have insurance.
    "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

  7. #327
    Sage
    VanceMack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:31 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    54,725

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Paschendale View Post
    The trouble with that, of course, is that the world and American views on healthcare are evolving. More and more, it's being considered a civil right. Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness kinda has to include health, otherwise you die, your liberties are reduced to just being on paper, and you can't pursue much happiness. Civil rights are really not an issue to be different between states. But, in general, Americans favor universal healthcare. If it were put to a straight popular vote, it would win easily. So, I think the mandate is there. Splitting it up by state just seems impractical.



    As a country, we have decided that no one should be excluded "based on cost". That's a very euphemistic term for insurance companies refusing to pay out when their services are actually called upon, by the way. Every person should be covered. Your assertion about blanket policies is also weird. Your point is to impugn a "one size fits all" approach, I assume. But covering everything... that really does fit all. And it can rein in the excesses of the medical industry. So yes, costs go down. Even if we stop refusing to treat people because they're actually sick.
    The trouble with doing it on a federal scale is that there is zero responsibility and accountability for funding those programs. Greater debt will incur and be dumped on future generations. States CAN be responsible. they SHOULD be responsible. No need for multiple layers of bureaucracy that WILL be abused.

  8. #328
    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]

    Not ALL patients...

  9. #329
    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
    The trouble with doing it on a federal scale is that there is zero responsibility and accountability for funding those programs. Greater debt will incur and be dumped on future generations. States CAN be responsible. they SHOULD be responsible. No need for multiple layers of bureaucracy that WILL be abused.
    I don't think that the abuse is necessarily a part of federal government and not of state government. States have plenty of abuse. The corrupting factors with federal government is based more on how much money they're dealing with, and so are the target of all the big corporate interests. I doubt that the states would be any different if they were handing issues on that scale. But that's on us to get the corporate influence out of government. Companies should not be able to write the legislation that governs their activities, nor make elected officials beholden to them by financing their election bids.
    Liberté. Égalité. Fraternité.

  10. #330
    Sage
    VanceMack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:31 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    54,725

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Paschendale View Post
    I don't think that the abuse is necessarily a part of federal government and not of state government. States have plenty of abuse. The corrupting factors with federal government is based more on how much money they're dealing with, and so are the target of all the big corporate interests. I doubt that the states would be any different if they were handing issues on that scale. But that's on us to get the corporate influence out of government. Companies should not be able to write the legislation that governs their activities, nor make elected officials beholden to them by financing their election bids.
    Added layers of bureaucracy automatically adds to the cost of a program. It is insane that we as a country insist that the states cant manage to take care of their citizens and we MUST by damn create more and greater dependence on the federal government. Pure lunacy.

Page 33 of 45 FirstFirst ... 23313233343543 ... 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
  •