Restaurant Owner to Imposes Surcharge For Obamacare

page: 24
39
<< 21  22  23    25  26  27 >>

log in

join

posted on Nov, 16 2012 @ 12:40 PM
link   
I am sure poor countries like Canada, Japan, and the UK just don't have a single restaurant to go too because the national healthcare is just too darned high!

We have so many European immigrants here, to see what it is like to sit in a restaurant and be waited on, it is a huge tourist industry for the US now!




posted on Nov, 16 2012 @ 12:46 PM
link   
reply to post by macman
 

I live in Florida, the land of employer scams. Employers down here think they can get away with anything because its a “right to work” state. I've taught a few of them over the years that this is not as true as they think it is. Also Florida does not have much in the way of production, and the jobs in this state are both limited in scope and pay. Unemployment down here is rampant ATM.
Anyway...
I work in a somewhat limited field (not a lot of facilities do what we do), and have had similar problems at other locations that I have left over the years. Right now its secure work for the moment, its close to home, and there is not much better in the area without gong to work in a hospital (which has lots of extra hoops to jump through). So, ATM, I've pushed them back into honoring the original agreement that I was hired under (minus getting any raises), and its enough to make me stay for now.

However, I am keeping my options open, and the first chance I see to get into something better, I'll take it.



posted on Nov, 16 2012 @ 12:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by mrnotobc

Originally posted by dogstar23
. The vast majority of businesses in the US are either large employers who DO offer health coverage already, and will thus be unaffected, or small businesses who are not part of the mandate, but will benefit if they DO offer coverage.

Anyone who thinks this is a sky-is-falling scenario for US businesses knows very little about the situation.


If this is true then what was the problem in the first place, since the vast majority was already covered.

Please explain how a small business that doesn't offer coverage now will benefit by offering coverage under Oboma care.


"Small businesses" under the plan are defined as less than 50 full-time employees. They are NOT required to offer a shared-cost plan as "large businesses" (50+ full-time employees are.). They don't have to do anything different.

Now, if they freely choose to, a small business can offer to cover all or part of their employees' health insurance, and will receive a tax credit of 35% of the cost. So if they pay $2000 toward an employees coverage, the employer's taxes will be reduced by $700. They would be paying $1300 in exchange for adding a benefit to the employee's benefit & compensation package. This improves recruiting and maintaining of employees. Easier to hire and keep quality employees if you provide health insurance as part of the deal.

The big thing people keep getting wrong is thinking truly "small businesses" are required to provide coverage. They're not, at all. Those who already choose to or will choose to in the future will have their taxes reduced.



posted on Nov, 16 2012 @ 12:52 PM
link   
reply to post by defcon5
 


Sounds like you have a plan.
But, also living in a "Right to Work State" and having lived in many others, I have yet to encounter issues that you have used as examples.
Don't think it has anything to do with "Right to Work". Sounds like you have hit some bad luck in finding quality employers.



posted on Nov, 16 2012 @ 12:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by defcon5
So he is going to cut employee hours, and add surcharges, on something that he isn't even required to pay. In other words, he is doing this just to make more personal profits at his employees expense.

I'm surprised others didn't notice that earlier. He is planning on "passing the cost" for something he isn't going to be paying for and he's getting cheered on by members of ATS.



posted on Nov, 16 2012 @ 12:55 PM
link   
I really do not see the big deal here...

Did people really believe that owners would cover the cost of healthcare for minimum wage workers out of the kindness of their hearts because the Government said so?

That whole idea is just silly beyond belief. Of course they would raise prices or find other ways to cover the cost without losing a piece of their bottom line. That's business in America and it has always been that way.

Allow me to let some of you in on a lil secret.... a lot of waitresses and waiters do not even make minimum wage from the employer. In many bars, gentleman's club, and even some restaurants they actually pay $2.25 per hour because of how much servers do make in tips...and doing so is perfectly legal.



posted on Nov, 16 2012 @ 12:57 PM
link   
reply to post by windword
 


Honestly everybody needs to look at what's really going on here. More than half of America voted for President Barack Obama to be reelected. Yet, nobody has a clue what Obama's policies truly are! Of course everyone is FOR ObamaCare, it SOUNDS GREAT! But until people start to take notice, PEOPLE need to ACT! This will help to enlighten the people. Their kids will ask, "But why is this happening? Isn't ObamaCare good?" and their parents will wonder, people WILL WONDER!



posted on Nov, 16 2012 @ 12:59 PM
link   
reply to post by windword
 


Every single day I log onto Facebook to see this president pass almost 70 regulations PER DAY. I see businesses suffering, SMALL BUSINESSES! And what remains? Corporate franchises! Atleast one is acting up.



posted on Nov, 16 2012 @ 01:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by MegaMind
I tell you now this country won't survive in its current form to 2014.
...
I know ... I'm a kook, a doom and gloomer


I applaud your knowledge and contribution.



posted on Nov, 16 2012 @ 01:12 PM
link   
reply to post by macman
 

I know of at least one employer in our area that has told their employees that they have to provide their own toilet paper if they wish to use the staff bathroom.


Yeah, lots of scam artists down here. They take advantage of the situation to extort their employees for as close to free labor as they can get away with. They figure that since its a “right to work” state its legal to do this, and who's going to call them on it anyway. They know that the labor down here has been bullied into believing that they just have to take this crap.

THIS is what the republicans are talking about when they say they want to get the “government out of the way” so business can be successful. That they want to remove all the last few rights that employees have in their favor, so that business can extort them to increase profits. Pretty soon we are going to be going back to the days of slavery and the 'company store' if we don't start standing up for our rights, and pushing back against this greed.

There is a reason why I mentioned the “eat cake” remark in my first post. That is because we are in the exact same scenario that the French were before the Revolution. Unnecessary wars, outrageous taxes on the working class, slave wages, increasing costs of living, the rich being out of touch with reality and feeling they have a right to exploit the masses for their own gain... History repeats, folks know this, that's why they are increasing the number of laws, and pushing the Real ID facial recognition tracking cards on us. Gotta mark the cattle 'troublemakers' before they get wise and rebel again.



posted on Nov, 16 2012 @ 01:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by MrDesolate
reply to post by RedShirt73
 


But see, that's his call. Therein lies the problem. The left wants to decide how the producers can spend their money, and the risk takers and entrepreneurs are just supposed to shut up and take it.

There's two sides to that coin. There should be no bailouts, no subsidies, no corporate welfare either. The government is trying to be all things to all people. Bail out the rich and supply everything to the poor. Who foots that bill?

The rest of us.

Good for this guy. If it's a bad move, the market will speak. As it should be.



Not disputing that he has that choice. All I'm saying is that he owns 88 restaurants, he obviously has the cash flow to ensure that his employees are taken care of with little, if any, inconvenience to himself. The decision he decided to make was one of greed IMHO and not on obamacare. I could understand his decision if he only owned a few restaurants as he probably wouldn't have the available funds, but 88 restaurants???



posted on Nov, 16 2012 @ 01:40 PM
link   
reply to post by defcon5
 

Oh come on. You are using a single, or handful of outrageous instances to rally against Reps and the idea for less Govt control in business. You know that and I know that.

I have worked for 15 years in right to work states and have yet to encounter anything close to what you suggest. I have worked for some real winners and real losers.

You still have the ability and right to leave there or stay.



posted on Nov, 16 2012 @ 01:41 PM
link   
reply to post by RedShirt73
 


Yes, he's obviously too big to fail so he should happily accommodate whatever burdensome load of garbage the government decides to shove in his direction. He didn't build that.

Hear that sound in the distance? Atlas is preparing to shrug. This is a tiny symptom.



posted on Nov, 16 2012 @ 01:43 PM
link   
reply to post by RedShirt73
 


Look him up on the web, hes all over the place. He also owns a bunch of Value Pawns, hotels, home healthcare companies, etc...
He's certainly not hurting in any way.
He owns homes in New York and Florida, and flies between his businesses all day.

The only employees he 'takes care of” are his managers if they make him more then $100K of profit one top of the rent and administration fees he charges each business. Obviously, he's pulling the same “capital gains” scam that I mentioned above.



posted on Nov, 16 2012 @ 02:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by MrDesolate
reply to post by RedShirt73
 


Yes, he's obviously too big to fail so he should happily accommodate whatever burdensome load of garbage the government decides to shove in his direction. He didn't build that.

Hear that sound in the distance? Atlas is preparing to shrug. This is a tiny symptom.


So government should stay 100 feet away from any and all laws designed to help protect the health and wellbeing of its citizens? Would you rather declare personal bankruptcy because you can't afford to pay your hospital bills or have at least some protection in the form of obamacare that would hopefully prevent that from happening?



posted on Nov, 16 2012 @ 02:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by dogstar23

Originally posted by mrnotobc
I wouldn't say it the way he is, but it's a fact of life all business's will raise their prices to cover the extra expense of Oboma care. I would just put on the menue a statement that all prices reflect a 5% increase to cover the cost of Oboma care.


The only businesses whose costs will go up are those with more than 50 full-time employees who do not currently provide shared-cost health insurance. Honestly, this will mainly affect franchise restaurants. Most grocery stores even provide healthcare coverage. The 60-employee business I work for provides shared-cost coverage...its a $50M+ revenue business with EBIT of over $7M.

Those with less than 50 employees will get a tax credt. The vast majority of businesses in the US are either large employers who DO offer health coverage already, and will thus be unaffected, or small businesses who are not part of the mandate, but will benefit if they DO offer coverage.

Anyone who thinks this is a sky-is-falling scenario for US businesses knows very little about the situation.


So you're saying self employed, and the growing number of people referred to a independent contractors, that don't have health insurance, won't have costs going up.

Myself, I'm self employed. My wife and I have no insurance. When we go to the doctor, we pay with our own money. Now I'm faced with a $1500 fine, which adds to my costs. If I decide to raise my prices to cover these costs, does that make me a scumbbag?



posted on Nov, 16 2012 @ 02:18 PM
link   
Because people like him do not want to take a pay cut, despite the fact they would still be making more than most. Think about all of the people who work for this guy for what amounts to slave labor. These employees cannot make enough to live on, even if they are good financial planners. They just do not make enough money, period, not to mention INSURANCE. These people are working just as hard as many others who make more money, so it is not like they are lazy and are trying to do what the GOP says they are trying to, which is sponge from the government or some other stupid claim like that.

So if they are working as many hours, and just as hard, as many others, why shouldn't they be able to support themselves? The people making all of the money want others to work for them for as little as possible, because then they get to make more money. They are not interested in taking care of their employees, and do not care if they can support themselves, because someone desperate enough will take the low paying job.

This is why I despise people like Romney who want less government regulation in business. If that occurs, then the workers are just going to end up getting screwed over even more, while the owners get richer. So now, with Obamacare, those who own these businesses are going to have to start giving insurance to full time employees, and I say GREAT. The employees are working hard, or should be if they are still employed, and they are making the owner money, therefore they should be able to support themselves and have insurance. It is that simple.

Some people are trying to say that these people do not deserve a decent wage, or insurance, because of their lowly job. Well them working at their lowly job is what is making the owners all the money. And it is people like this, especially Republicans, who do not want to see something like Obamacare, because they are not going to make as much money. They say it will cost them money, but in fact it should be worded as them making less.

They just do not want to have to pay wages that someone can live on, because that means less money for them. So now what we are going to see is employees hiring a bunch of workers, and only allow them to work something like 25 hours a week, so they do not have to give them insurance. This is just going to ruin our economy more, as more and more people are not able to support themselves. People cannot support themselves, despite the fact they are willing to work, but we can give billions and billions to the financial elite via a bailout? 4 TRILLION dollars is announced as missing from the Pentagon on 9-10-2001, yet people are starving here in the US? This is why I despise the financial elite.



posted on Nov, 16 2012 @ 02:23 PM
link   
reply to post by RedShirt73
 


I would rather the government remain focused on their lawful and Constitutionally mandated tasks rather than attempting to micromanage every aspect of everyone's lives. A government capable of giving you everything you need is capable of taking everything you have.

This is why we're doomed. Too many people look for the government to solve every social problem. Everything the government does is heavy handed and rife with unintended consequences. But guys like the one in the opening post can afford it, right? Let's soak them all.

You think that'll work? Those guys are exponentially craftier and more intelligent than the dumbasses in Congress. No, the middle class will take it right up the tailpipe.

We're going down, hard. Because you can't continue to push the entire burden on one facet of the economy. See what Hostess did? Go ahead, tell these guys what they're permitted to keep after the government gets done making sure everyone has a blankie and bottle. Let's see how long that lasts.



posted on Nov, 16 2012 @ 02:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by mrnotobc

So you're saying self employed, and the growing number of people referred to a independent contractors, that don't have health insurance, won't have costs going up.

Myself, I'm self employed. My wife and I have no insurance. When we go to the doctor, we pay with our own money. Now I'm faced with a $1500 fine, which adds to my costs. If I decide to raise my prices to cover these costs, does that make me a scumbbag?



No doubt it will be hard on some people. Just a quick question, are there any tax breaks that you guys get from this?



posted on Nov, 16 2012 @ 02:25 PM
link   
reply to post by JiggyPotamus
 


It goes back to "Who owns the business"?

The workers do not. The Owner does. The business is there to make him a profit, not provide jobs and health insurance to workers.

For their work, they get paid a wage, regardless if you think it is slave labor or not.
Health insurance is a "Benefit" in any business. It is not a right.
edit on 16-11-2012 by macman because: (no reason given)





new topics

top topics



 
39
<< 21  22  23    25  26  27 >>

log in

join