Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Restaurant Owner to Imposes Surcharge For Obamacare

page: 28
39
<< 25  26  27    29  30  31 >>

log in

join

posted on Nov, 17 2012 @ 12:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by ceranko
They need to follow how Norway and Sweden take care of this.


Verily, verily thou hast spoken.




posted on Nov, 17 2012 @ 12:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by windword
reply to post by MidnightSunshine
 


Don't feel bad. There are actual multi-restaurant controllers and CPAs that have posted facts about the ACA in this thread, refuting these ignorant ranters, that are also being ignored. You're in good company.

Haters gonna hate. Trolls are gonna troll and try to derail the subject matter of this thread, bringing with them all their ignorant bigotry.


Perhaps a can of this will help...in the spirit of this post...



posted on Nov, 17 2012 @ 12:56 PM
link   
reply to post by ascension211
 


HAHA! I actually have that can of spray in my arsenal.


I used it on one specific troll, and got fined 500 points with a T&C banner. Too up close and personal!



edit on 17-11-2012 by windword because: grammer



posted on Nov, 17 2012 @ 01:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by windword
reply to post by ascension211
 


HAHA! I actually have that can of spray in my arsenal.


I used it on one specific troll, and got fined 500 points with a T&C banner. Too up close and personal!



edit on 17-11-2012 by windword because: grammer


Depends on how you use it...i originally used it in this thread
www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on Nov, 17 2012 @ 01:17 PM
link   
The waiters should also write down on the bill how big the portion of the bill is that goes as profit towards the owner.



posted on Nov, 17 2012 @ 02:11 PM
link   
so a 20 dollar meal will cost 21 dollars now?

thats it, I am gonna starve now!


...or not..wait, hold on..so 20 dollars...now 21 dollars...but now most people have healthcare and not be riddled with cancer they cant afford to treat...

I can live with that...such a massive sacrifice I make to help others. I deserve a nobel peace prize for not flipping out about a buck considering someones life may literally be saved from that dollar.

how small would I be to complain actually...tiny tiny little person...not even worth the carbon required to make up my biology really.



posted on Nov, 17 2012 @ 03:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by Jeremiah65

Originally posted by elouina
reply to post by FreebirdGirl
 


And Obama had 4 years to fix this.



To the uneducated...I offer this bit of information and edification....

The "real" experts....aka...economists...said that our economy had collapsed so far in 07/08 that it was going to take 10 to 12 years to recover. I do not give a big rat's @ss as to who is in the Whitehouse...it is what it is. If...for one second...you thought one limited power puppet was going to fix crapola...you are a moron...I don't care who is "the prez"...he is not going to fix shiz....you need to wake up and get a damn clue.

Our economy will correct itself as it should and it is only going to take one element....time...how f'ing painful is that for you to swallow? I don't care if Romney or Ron Paul or Gary Johnson or Jesus was elected....it takes nothing but time to fix these things...stfu and grow up....there is no damn magic bullets to fix a collapsed economy.


Well then you must be referring to our president Obama when you say uneducated. And I agree 100%! In 2008, he promised to cut the deficit by half in 4 years. He bragged of his counsel of economics projections of 6% unemployment being realized before his next term. And he also projected 5-23 % economic growth. Etc.... In other words he promised to work magic. All while spending us 4 trillion dollars deeper into debt.

And in all honesty, a republican president being elected would have made a positive economic impact without him doing a thing. Democrats are known to spend spend spend our way into more debt. Why do you think the UK was so concerned about or election? They knew a republican in office could have affected their economy positively. Sometimes just knowing that someone will cut the bull makes a difference. Emotional factors do affect our economy. When our economy was at its worst, folks said to me ," hey why are you dining out in expensive restaurants? You shouldn't be doing this". And I said why not, I have the money and the restaurants deserve to make a living. But my point is that the economy nose dived even further out of fear of spending.

And lastly, you should not turn everyone you disagree with into the enemy. We are here to discuss things maturely, and not throw cuss words and insults back and forth. Choose your enemies wisely.

edit on 17-11-2012 by elouina because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 17 2012 @ 03:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by windword
reply to post by ascension211
 


HAHA! I actually have that can of spray in my arsenal.


I used it on one specific troll, and got fined 500 points with a T&C banner. Too up close and personal!



edit on 17-11-2012 by windword because: grammer


Why can't people just debate these topics without resorting to calling their opponents trolls?



posted on Nov, 17 2012 @ 03:31 PM
link   
reply to post by elouina
 





Well then you must be referring to our president Obama when you say uneducated. And I agree 100%! In 2008, he promised to cut the deficit by half in 4 years. He bragged of his counsel of economics projections of 6% unemployment being realized before his next term. And he also projected 5-23 % economic growth. Etc.... In other words he promised to work magic. All while spending us 4 trillion dollars deeper into debt.


I can't be sure without spending all of time going through archives, but weren't those promises made before anybody, Rebulicans included, knew about the debt crisis that was looming. The one that Mitt Romney thought, in light of, we should let Detroit go bankrupt, and John McCain wanted suspended the whole campaign to address?



posted on Nov, 17 2012 @ 03:38 PM
link   
Wait, you mean a business owner still has the freedom to dictate how much he is going to charge for services and items at his business? Thats insane.

I dont see the problem here. If people do not want to go to his businees because of this, then it is the business owners loss. If people still want to go there, pay the surcharge, then the business owner wins.

If you dont like it, dont go. Problem solved.



posted on Nov, 17 2012 @ 03:39 PM
link   
reply to post by elouina
 





And in all honesty, a republican president being elected would have made a positive economic impact without him doing a thing. Democrats are known to spend spend spend our way into more debt.


Really so how do you explain what happened to the economy under G.W. Bush? The truth is candidates will say what is takes to get elected. Meanwhile they use propaganda to have the sheeple declare themselves Republican or Democrats. After the elections the sheeple point the fingers at each other and fight. Old trick new ponies.


Deny Ignorance



posted on Nov, 17 2012 @ 03:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus

Originally posted by windword
reply to post by ascension211
 


HAHA! I actually have that can of spray in my arsenal.


I used it on one specific troll, and got fined 500 points with a T&C banner. Too up close and personal!



edit on 17-11-2012 by windword because: grammer


Why can't people just debate these topics without resorting to calling their opponents trolls?



Because half of the people hear are so eager to pass their agenda they spit lies without any attempt to research and find the truth. Are you guilty?



posted on Nov, 17 2012 @ 03:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by jacobe001

Originally posted by macman
reply to post by Indigo5
 




But, I am sure you feel that is just evil, as businesses should be there to employe people, and not make a profit for someone.



Someone admitting that their sole purpose is not "Job Creators" unlike we have been told.


Well, they are job creators but they make a profit, and why would anyone want to run a business that loses money? No one will do that, because it will be communism and we know already from Mother Russia that communism doesn't work and that people suffer from not wanting to help themselves or others. The Adam Smith principle works here. Help others by helping yourself.



posted on Nov, 17 2012 @ 04:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by FreebirdGirl
reply to post by elouina
 





And in all honesty, a republican president being elected would have made a positive economic impact without him doing a thing. Democrats are known to spend spend spend our way into more debt.


Really so how do you explain what happened to the economy under G.W. Bush? The truth is candidates will say what is takes to get elected. Meanwhile they use propaganda to have the sheeple declare themselves Republican or Democrats. After the elections the sheeple point the fingers at each other and fight. Old trick new ponies.


Deny Ignorance


As for telling folks what they want to hear, do you think this is right to do? I certainly don't. What it comes down to is that we have presidents lying to their constituants. And we are supposed to trust them to run an entire country? After proving himself to be a lier, Obama should not have been elected for a second term. Then they would learn not to pull this bull...

As for Bush, he was a bit of a war monger. And perhaps someone that we needed at that particular time in US history. Although he did go a bit overboard. But generally, republicans spend less than democrats. Nothing is ever black and white though.
edit on 17-11-2012 by elouina because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 17 2012 @ 06:57 PM
link   
reply to post by elouina
 



Democrats are known to spend spend spend our way into more debt. Why do you think the UK was so concerned about or election? They knew a republican in office could have affected their economy positively. Sometimes just knowing that someone will cut the bull makes a difference.

I gotta say I dont really believe that statement. it is historically inaccurate.
arthuride.files.wordpress.com...

Furthermore the spending didnt start with Obama. If you recall Bush tried to pas a last minute bailout which was denied, so he waited till congress was on recess and pushed it through anyway with Paulsen.

Although I will agree it continued under Obama. The bleeding is always hard to stop when youre hemorrhaging.
Spending and deficit it notorious for Rep. not Dems.



As for Bush, he was a bit of a war monger. And perhaps someone that we needed at that particular time in US history. Although he did go a bit overboard. But generally, republicans spend less than democrats. Nothing is ever black and white though.


you are absolutely correct nothing is as simple as black and white.
edit on 17-11-2012 by Quailar because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 17 2012 @ 07:57 PM
link   
reply to post by Quailar
 


It didn't start with Obama, but Obama is way overspending Bush, and we have added the Obamacare stuff too.



posted on Nov, 17 2012 @ 08:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by windword

You think that $1500 a year, for two people, is a lot? That $1500 will go into a fund that will pay for ALL the uninsured, that will not have to loose everything they own, should they fall ill. This includes you, should you find yourself uninsured and in need of extensive care.


The fact that I don't approve of this makes no difference to you does it komrade? It's all about the kollective.

It's impossible for me to express my displeasure about having to do this, without risking being thrown off this forum. I'm just not good enough with words to do it. I'm not a rich person. It I was I would probably buy health insurance in the first place. $1500 is a lot of money to my wife and I. I'm sorry but this is how I feel. This is my money. You didn't make this, I did. Now I'm forced to give to give it away against my will. What has come of this country? What's wrong with some of you people? What makes you think you have the right?

edit on 17-11-2012 by mrnotobc because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 17 2012 @ 08:08 PM
link   
reply to post by FreebirdGirl
 


Way to get around the T&C rules.

No, i am not guilty in the least. I do a great deal of research. I do not use as a general rule use Huffington Post as sources, except once in a blue moon just to show liberals what they themselves are spewing.

I would add, just because you don't like my opinion doesn't mean I am wrong. I do have some understanding of basic comparisons of different kinds of economic systems, and our economy here in the US is what is referred to as a mixed economy. That is why some liberals get away with saying we are not a socialist country, because technically we do not operate exclusively under a socialist system, but we have elements of socialism mixed in with our Capitalist base, and then there is Keynesian economics, which goes on the basis that if people are not spending money, the economy contracts, so the Fed will expand the economy as it sees fit, and then contracts it if they feel it is expanding too fast.
Now here is some commentary about Adam Smith's "Invisible Hand"


In economics, the invisible hand of the market is a metaphor conceived by Adam Smith to describe the self-regulating behavior of the marketplace.[1] The exact phrase is used just three times in Smith's writings, but has come to capture his important claim that individuals' efforts to maximize their own gains in a free market benefits society, even if the ambitious have no benevolent intentions. Smith came up with the two meanings of the phrase from Richard Cantillon who developed both economic applications in his model of the isolated estate.[2]



The theory of the Invisible Hand states that if each consumer is allowed to choose freely what to buy and each producer is allowed to choose freely what to sell and how to produce it, the market will settle on a product distribution and prices that are beneficial to all the individual members of a community, and hence to the community as a whole. The reason for this is that self-interest drives actors to beneficial behavior in a case of serendipity. Efficient methods of production are adopted to maximize profits. Low prices are charged to maximize revenue through gain in market share by undercutting competitors. Investors invest in those industries most urgently needed to maximize returns, and withdraw capital from those less efficient in creating value. All these effects take place dynamically and automatically.[citation needed

en.wikipedia.org...

So if you really want to suggest that my ideas about a restaurant owner having to come up with a way to stay profitable in a time when the Progressives are expaning bureaucratic control of the economy, I bet I will come out ahead in the discourse, because I HAVE done my homework, and likely you have only listened to Huffpo or some Democrat operative.

I was reading Antony Sutton books on Skull and Bones and The Order years and years ago and knew about Hegelian Dialectic in the 80's. I am conservative but that doesn't mean I let the Bush family off the hook. They are all involved.

I knew about the Tri lateral commission and CFR back then too. I know about the Bilderbergs. These secretive organizations are not just coming from both Republican and Democrat Parties but are also Internationalists and don't care what country they screw up.
if you really want to challenge me to a duel about whether Progressivism and socialism/communism is good for our country, let's have at it. I'm game. Are you? Or are you just going to accuse me of being a liar but word it so the Mods don't smack you down?
edit on 17-11-2012 by ThirdEyeofHorus because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 17 2012 @ 08:18 PM
link   
reply to post by FreebirdGirl
 





Because half of the people hear are so eager to pass their agenda they spit lies without any attempt to research and find the truth. Are you guilty?


I wonder if you were were ever aware of hte long bread lines in Russia before the fall of the Communist Empire there? It really demonstrated the failure of a centralized control of the means of production, which is one of the major definitions of communism. You see, when govt tries to take over all the functions of private businesses, it cannot possibly run all the day to day functions and predict the levels of supply it must provide. This is one of the reasons for the failure, because private industry can better control the supply and demand flow based on their niche of the market. This is a fact, not an opinion, and you will be hard pressed to find materials in real economic books which will refute my statement, unless it is communist propaganda.



posted on Nov, 17 2012 @ 09:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by SaturnFX
...or not..wait, hold on..so 20 dollars...now 21 dollars...but now most people have healthcare and not be riddled with cancer they cant afford to treat...

I can live with that...such a massive sacrifice I make to help others. I deserve a nobel peace prize for not flipping out about a buck considering someones life may literally be saved from that dollar.


You got it right, buddy. I'm with you 1000%. The mileage of the egotistical types that frequent the ATS may vary. It's always about MONEY, for the retards. They call it "freedom". Selfish POS.





new topics

top topics



 
39
<< 25  26  27    29  30  31 >>

log in

join