Employers and Obamacare
EdsonNascimento
Posts: 5,521
http://money.msn.com/now/post.aspx?post ... 3824f93591
The most fascinating part is actually toward the end about a supporter of the policy (reality IS a bitch):
Other restaurant franchises, meanwhile, are also looking at options ahead of Obamacare. John Rigos, owner of a Five Guys franchise in New York City, told CBS News the new regulations will affect hiring policies at his restaurants.
"It'll probably have to reduce the staff to some degree," he said, "and again, focus on building [a] smaller stronger team rather than being as aggressive in opening up new stores and creating new jobs."
Rigos said while he "absolutely" supports Obamacare, he still finds it challenging.
"There's 25,000 restaurants within the New York City market we're competing against," he notes, "so it's not like we have surplus profits that we could just earmark a portion of them to go toward these types of initiatives."
The most fascinating part is actually toward the end about a supporter of the policy (reality IS a bitch):
Other restaurant franchises, meanwhile, are also looking at options ahead of Obamacare. John Rigos, owner of a Five Guys franchise in New York City, told CBS News the new regulations will affect hiring policies at his restaurants.
"It'll probably have to reduce the staff to some degree," he said, "and again, focus on building [a] smaller stronger team rather than being as aggressive in opening up new stores and creating new jobs."
Rigos said while he "absolutely" supports Obamacare, he still finds it challenging.
"There's 25,000 restaurants within the New York City market we're competing against," he notes, "so it's not like we have surplus profits that we could just earmark a portion of them to go toward these types of initiatives."
Sorry. The world doesn't work the way you tell it to.
Post edited by Unknown User on
0
Comments
"...I changed by not changing at all..."
We're all paying for "Obamasurance" out of our own pockets. Nobody is giving anything to any of us.
...are those who've helped us.
Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.
I wish there had been a debate instead of ramming a bill through.
Killing the golden goose. This reality is why Clinton backed off.
Just curious.....Don't you pay for health anyhow? And I know you do, so what difference does it really make? Or is it all about dog eat dog down there and if you can't afford insurance you lose?
The poison from the poison stream caught up to you ELEVEN years ago and you floated out of here. Sept. 14, 08
:roll:
Had it been a bipartisan process the end result, in my mind, would have been better. But it was more important to just say no and try to kill it because it came from Obama.
"...I changed by not changing at all..."
and that is the honest truth. they refused to have a real discussion. as a result we got a shitty bill. THAT is the consequence of people putting idealogy over constituents and over country.
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
It is a valid question. Not sure the time would every be right but it may be better than now.
"...I changed by not changing at all..."
It was never presented for debate. Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi had full authority to determine the docket. They thought it better to ram something through without anyone even reading it than even TRYING to have a debate. It is a consistent theme for the last 4 years.
Harry Reid is allowed to speak on the floor of the Senate without permission from anyone.
According to MSNBC
and conservative radio.
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
You are right - most of the media takes this stance. I wonder why. Hmmmmm....
Again - what stopped Reid and Pelosi from presenting debates to the floors of both the House and the Senate?
So what you are saying is that it is a very good outcome that they approved 2,000+ page legislation without anyone reading it. Interesting.
It is almost like Harry Reid is the Majority Leader or something!
You have a much different memory of the last four years than I do. And however the bill was passed, the GOP's only interest was to filibuster and/or kill the bill. There was no serious debate to be had and the bill is weaker for it. You can insist on playing the partisan game and blaming one party all you want, but it was a bipartisan failure.
"...I changed by not changing at all..."
I do not disagree that it might have ended up that way. But, much like the GOP's threat to not increase taxes on anyone - you never know until you try. And they simply never tried. Obama, Reid and Pelosi played this out in the media, so folks would remember it exactly as has been espoused here. But, the fact is, it was never even PUT UP for debate. The gang of 3 simply pointed fingers, the media and zealots ate it up, then produced a bill and gave everyone a weekend to read it which was impossible because it was 2,000+ pages. So they passed major legislation by playing to the media and pandering to the idiots. Hmmm. Sounds familiar.
I didn't say it solved the problem. Neither did the article. All it was pointing out is the failures everyone saw coming that the dolts said - don't worry about that - thus COMPOUNDING the problem you allude to. THAT's the point.
whats the point of the article and your post? "I told you so"? genius!
What I find amusing and typical is the fact that even if it is a crap law, it's somehow the GOP fault
Anywho, within a week of the election our company sent out a 'what if' survey'
'what if we didn't offer paid health care, would you go to another company?'
'what if we didn't offer health care but provide more paid vacation?'
'what if there was no annual performance bonus but you still had paid healthcare'
you get the idea, what's funny is the Obama supporters walked around saying 'oh I'm sure they won't change our health care!' noooo, of course not, because our board and CEO live in the land of rainbows and butterflies where all is free and the bottom line doesn't matter :roll:
I assume all retail job markets will be affected by this.
And most part-time workers are usually in the lower pay bracket.
Hmm .... Forward?
:think:
This has already started at my job....
Again, this was a two party failure. You are sent to Washington to govern, not to beat the other party. The GOP in this instance refused to do so and the Democrats went unchecked. If the bill is shit both parties have that shit on their hands.
"...I changed by not changing at all..."
Yes, I do pay some for health insurance and my employer pays some as well. I would prefer they gave me the money they spend and I could manage my own health care.
But - my point is that a lot of people think that benefits come from the government or employers at no cost. The reality is that we all foot the bill. I think individuals should take care of their own health care and not hand control for important decisions over to their employers and the government.
...are those who've helped us.
Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.
these bills failed the first 37 times, maybe the 38th is the magic vote...
:fp:
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
it was 900 pages.
the republicans did not even offer a competitive plan. their plan was only "NOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!"
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
Agreed that was stupid and purely political.
Oops!!! 900 pages.
How about - we have other problems to address right now like the ECONOMY, STUPID!!!!!! (not calling you stupid, just to be clear. That is one party speaking to another).
When exactly was the competitive plan supposed to be proposed and debated?
They made a bad situation worse just so they could get their names in the history books. Well, they did alrighty. But, all publicity is in fact NOT good publicity.