Originally posted by defuntion
reply to post by OptimusSubprime
Originally posted by OptimusSubprime
He is the owner of the restaurant and can charge whatever he wants. This is the way taxes work... the cost of all taxes and regulations imposed on
business by the government is always passed on to the consumer, and yet this logic seems to escape the progressive policy makers in
In a free market, supply and demand determines price. Even more so in the restuarant business since menu price outstrips food cost by nearly 300%.
By yours and John Metz's logic should not the bill also itemize the employers burden of Social Security, Medicaire, Medicaid and Unemployment?
Contributions that far outweigh his proposed "Obamacare" estimation?
Those costs...employee payroll and benefits are built into the cost on the menu, like every other cost..
how much you pay for food will determine how much you need to charge for it. Generally, food cost should be around 30-35%. This means that if you pay
$1.00 for something, you need to charge minimum of $3.34. It may seem like you are charging a lot more than necessary, but keep in mind that you
aren't just paying for the food itself. You are paying someone to prepare the food, serve the food, and clean up after the food. Everything in your
restaurant, from payroll to the electric bill needs to be covered by the food you serve.
And while we are at it...No one has answered my question...if he is looking to protect his price by itemizing the paultry, and thus far fictional,
estimate of 5% cost....then why hasn't he itemized the MUCH GREATER cost risk to his chain...the increase in beef prices by 100% in the past few
years..."Where's the Beef!..Tax"???
The only answer I can find to any of these questions is that he is looking to make an il-advised political statement that is not founded in finance,
math or logic and is at the same time a very stupid business decision regardless of political affiliation. Rule number one in business...do not sh*&
where you eat...leave the politics at home.
edit on 15-11-2012 by Indigo5 because: (no reason given)