Democrats continue to decimate the "little guy" in favor of their GREED

[P@triot]

Businesses Cutting Hours, Refusing To Hire, Refusing To Build, Bracing for Costs of Obamacare

"We've calculated it will [cost] some millions of dollars across our system. So what does that say—that says we won't build more restaurants. We won't hire more people," Zane Tankel, chairman and CEO of Apple-Metro, which runs 40 Applebee's restaurants.

"There's no other way we can survive it, because we think it will cost us 50 cents a sandwich. That's just the actual cost. If you have 40 or 50 employees at a restaurant, and the penalty is $2,000, and you're going to pay $80,000 or $100,000 penalty, there goes the profit in your restaurant."—Jimmy John Liautaud, founder of Jimmy John's subs, who said he was considering cutting workers’ hours to come in under the Obamacare mandate threshold.

“It’s a great concept. We want to have everyone insured. The problem is, who is going to pay for it and how are we going to accomplish this?” — John Metz, who operates roughly 40 Denny’s locations and five Hurricane Grill & Wings franchises in Florida, Virginia, and Georgia, and has said he may have to add an Obamacare surcharge to his menus.

“New unit construction will cease if we have to allocate moneys for that construction to the [Affordable Care Act]. And building new restaurants is how we create jobs.” — Andy Puzder, CEO of CKE Restaurants, which owns Hardee’s and Carl’s Jr.

Morning Bell: Business Owners on the Cost of Obamacare

 

[P@triot]

So the low wage resteraunt workers who need the work the most will have their hours cut. The unemployed who need the jobs the most, will have no hiring opportunitites. And the low wage construction workers will have nothing to build.

And to think that the idiot liberals actually believe the Dumbocrat Party is for the "little people". Their policies have created a massive economic meltdown while the Obama's take lavish vacations and shopping spree's, and Barack Obama and Joe Biden go golfing at the most expensive courses in America several times per week.

 

[occupied]

Like you give a shit about the little guy, whenever I see a conservative acting populist I start looking for the special interest angle and look-a-there, some low wage paying prick complaining about something.

 

[Zoom-boing]

Health insurance tied to employment is retarded. Does the ACA even address this? I sure haven't heard that it does. Why in the world should health insurance be dictated by where you're employed or by how many hours you work and if you lose your job you also lose your health insurance? Dumb, dumb, dumb.

 

[Mac1958]

Health insurance tied to employment is retarded. Does the ACA even address this? I sure haven't heard that it does. Why in the world should health insurance be dictated by where you're employed or by how many hours you work and if you lose your job you also lose your health insurance? Dumb, dumb, dumb.

If those who wrote the law didn't have their heads straight up their ass, they may have thought about this. Not that the other party's "ideas" have been any better.

What a fuckin' mess.

.

 

[Polk]

Health insurance tied to employment is retarded. Does the ACA even address this? I sure haven't heard that it does. Why in the world should health insurance be dictated by where you're employed or by how many hours you work and if you lose your job you also lose your health insurance? Dumb, dumb, dumb.

Depends on firm size. While larger firms face penalties for workers using federal subsidies to purchase insurance, small firms get tax credits for providing insurance.

 

[OKTexas]

Like you give a shit about the little guy, whenever I see a conservative acting populist I start looking for the special interest angle and look-a-there, some low wage paying prick complaining about something.

Bitch, bitch, bitch. Food service has always been mostly low paying entry level jobs. Why aren't you jumping up and down on your dear leader to improve the business climate in this country to encourage businesses to bring manufacturing back to this country? That's where we've lost the higher paying middle class jobs.

 

[Amelia]

Health insurance tied to employment is retarded. Does the ACA even address this? I sure haven't heard that it does. Why in the world should health insurance be dictated by where you're employed or by how many hours you work and if you lose your job you also lose your health insurance? Dumb, dumb, dumb.

Depends on firm size. While larger firms face penalties for workers using federal subsidies to purchase insurance, small firms get tax credits for providing insurance.

So with the ACA, legislators built a barrier to expansion beyond a certain size.

It will take a huge amount of capital and optimism to convince someone to make what would otherwise be a natural extension of a small business. Such as someone with a successful restaurant opening a second restaurant on the other side of town, doubling the number of people they can hire, and bringing their total number of employees to more than 50. This sort of natural behavior has been impeded by the federal government.


Another apparently unforeseen consequence is rising numbers of people whose work hours are capped at 29 making it harder for them to escape from the ranks of the working poor.

Did Democrats really not see that coming?

 

[Polk]

Any sort of regulation is going to create barriers at a certain point. It's part of the arbitrary nature of selection.

And plenty of businesses already hire large numbers of "part-time" employees (giving them slightly less than needed to qualify as full-time), so they can offer competitive benefit packages on paper, but no one actually gets them in practice.

 

[tooAlive]

This is what America voted for. Congratulations, democrats.

You guys have great ideas, you just forgot to figure out who would pay for them.

 

[bripat9643]

Like you give a shit about the little guy, whenever I see a conservative acting populist I start looking for the special interest angle and look-a-there, some low wage paying prick complaining about something.

Whenever libturds start some new campaign to save humanity, it's almost a guarantee that the lower income taxpayers are the ones who will take it up the ass.

 

[Amelia]

Any sort of regulation is going to create barriers at a certain point. It's part of the arbitrary nature of selection.

And plenty of businesses already hire large numbers of "part-time" employees (giving them slightly less than needed to qualify as full-time), so they can offer competitive benefit packages on paper, but no one actually gets them in practice.

So Democrats have no excuse at all for not seeing that they were going to make an already known problem that much worse by making almost universal the need to consider the possibility of having to cut people's hours in order to avoid taking large government-mandated economic hits.

 

[bripat9643]

Any sort of regulation is going to create barriers at a certain point. It's part of the arbitrary nature of selection.

Wrong, it's part of the arbitrary nature of government regulation. Government bureaucrats imagine they are competent to make decisions for all the thousands upon thousands of businesses in this country, but the knowledge required surpasses the ability of hundreds of super computers, even if they had the ability to collect it all

And plenty of businesses already hire large numbers of "part-time" employees (giving them slightly less than needed to qualify as full-time), so they can offer competitive benefit packages on paper, but no one actually gets them in practice.

That, again, is the result of the arrogance of bureaucrats who think they can make decisions for hundreds of thousands of businesses.

 

[tooAlive]

Any sort of regulation is going to create barriers at a certain point. It's part of the arbitrary nature of selection.

And plenty of businesses already hire large numbers of "part-time" employees (giving them slightly less than needed to qualify as full-time), so they can offer competitive benefit packages on paper, but no one actually gets them in practice.

Communistic ideals are barriers themselves. No way getting around it.

But it's all for the greater good, right?

 

[Amelia]

Any sort of regulation is going to create barriers at a certain point. It's part of the arbitrary nature of selection.

Wrong, it's part of the arbitrary nature of government regulation. Government bureaucrats imagine they are competent to make decisions for all the thousands upon thousands of businesses in this country, but the knowledge required surpasses the ability of hundreds of super computers, even if they had the ability to collect it all

Well said.

 

[Polk]

Any selection will have an arbitrary element to it. What substantive difference is there between someone 20 years, 364 days old, and someone 21 years old that justifies one being able to purchase alcohol, and the other not? The same argument exists for every regulation is existence. If we went off the standards you guys are proposing, there couldn't be any laws against child molestation (no age of consent) and toddlers could get a driver's license (no limit on driving age).

 

[Amelia]

Any selection will have an arbitrary element to it. What substantive difference is there between someone 20 years, 364 days old, and someone 21 years old that justifies one being able to purchase alcohol, and the other not? The same argument exists for every regulation is existence. If we went off the standards you guys are proposing, there couldn't be any laws against child molestation (no age of consent) and toddlers could get a driver's license (no limit on driving age).

Making laws against child molestation makes sense.

Non-business people making laws which fundamentally change how thousands of businesses make hiring decisions, making the choice to hire inherently more expensive during a time when hiring is already in crisis -- makes no sense at all.

 

[bripat9643]

Any selection will have an arbitrary element to it. What substantive difference is there between someone 20 years, 364 days old, and someone 21 years old that justifies one being able to purchase alcohol, and the other not? The same argument exists for every regulation is existence. If we went off the standards you guys are proposing, there couldn't be any laws against child molestation (no age of consent) and toddlers could get a driver's license (no limit on driving age).

Ask the guy who doesn't get hired or has his schedule reduced to under 30 hours a week what the "substantive difference" is. We aren't talking about the age at which some privilege is granted. We are talking about imposing severe financial penalties on business. No one is going to avoid becoming another year older, but every business in the country will do what it can to avoid massive cost increases. That's what businesses do.

It's thinking like yours that are responsible for monstrosities like this. People don't become business owners by being stupid, but that's exactly what bureaucratic nightmares like ACA are based on.

 

[Polk]

Any selection will have an arbitrary element to it. What substantive difference is there between someone 20 years, 364 days old, and someone 21 years old that justifies one being able to purchase alcohol, and the other not? The same argument exists for every regulation is existence. If we went off the standards you guys are proposing, there couldn't be any laws against child molestation (no age of consent) and toddlers could get a driver's license (no limit on driving age).

Making laws against child molestation makes sense.

Non-business people making laws which fundamentally change how thousands of businesses make hiring decisions, making the choice to hire inherently more expensive during a time when hiring is already in crisis -- makes no sense at all.

That argument, in and of itself, is nonsense. If we repealed every regulation or statute that makes hiring workers more expensive at the margin, there goes any sort of workplace safety rules, the minimum wage, overtime, etc.

 

[Polk]

Any selection will have an arbitrary element to it. What substantive difference is there between someone 20 years, 364 days old, and someone 21 years old that justifies one being able to purchase alcohol, and the other not? The same argument exists for every regulation is existence. If we went off the standards you guys are proposing, there couldn't be any laws against child molestation (no age of consent) and toddlers could get a driver's license (no limit on driving age).

Ask the guy who doesn't get hired or has his schedule reduced to under 30 hours a week what the "substantive difference" is. We aren't talking about the age at which some privilege is granted. We are talking about imposing severe financial penalties on business. No one is going to avoid becoming another year older, but every business in the country will do what it can to avoid massive cost increases. That's what businesses do.

It's thinking like yours that are responsible for monstrosities like this. People don't become business owners by being stupid, but that's exactly what bureaucratic nightmares like ACA are based on.

Many of the firms who complained the penalties have realized that making the sorts of business changes you're saying they will costs more money than compliance.

Olive Garden, Red Lobster parent to announce it will hold off on health changes - CBS News