Why I will not vote for Obama

Wiseacre

Retired USAF Chief
Apr 8, 2011
6,025
1,298
48
San Antonio, TX
You want a few reasons why the US economy is sluggish? By this time, most economies have recovered and have experienced significant growth and more jobs after a recession is over. But not this time, and Mr Will talks about why.


Choking on Obamacare
By George F. Will, Published: December 2

In 1941, Carl Karcher was a 24-year-old truck driver for a bakery. Impressed by the large numbers of buns he was delivering, he scrounged up $326 to buy a hot dog cart across from a Goodyear plant. And the war came.

So did millions of defense industry workers and their cars. And, soon, Southern California’s contribution to American cuisine — fast food. Including, eventually, hundreds of Carl’s Jr. restaurants. Karcher died in 2008, but his legacy, CKE Restaurants, survives. It would thrive, says CEO Andy Puzder, but for government’s comprehensive campaign against job creation.

CKE, with more than 3,200 restaurants (Carl’s Jr. and Hardee’s), has created 70,000 jobs, 21,000 directly and 49,000 with franchisees. The growth of those numbers will be inhibited by — among many government measures — Obama*care.

When CKE’s health-care advisers, citing Obamacare’s complexities, opacities and uncertainties, said that it would add between $7.3 million and $35.1 million to the company’s $12 million health-care costs in 2010, Puzder said: I need a number I can plan with. They guessed $18 million — twice what CKE spent last year building new restaurants. Obamacare must mean fewer restaurants.

And therefore fewer jobs. Each restaurant creates, on average, 25 jobs — and as much as 3.5 times that number of jobs in the community. (CKE spends about $1 billion a year on food and paper products, $175 million on advertising, $33 million on maintenance, etc.)

Puzder laughs about the liberal theory that businesses are not investing because they want to “punish Obama.” Rising health-care costs are, he says, just one uncertainty inhibiting expansion. Others are government policies raising fuel costs, which infect everything from air conditioning to the cost (including deliveries) of supplies, and the threat that the National Labor Relations Board will use regulations to impose something like “card check” in place of secret-ballot unionization elections.

CKE has about 720 California restaurants, in which 84 percent of the managers are minorities and 67 percent are women. CKE has, however, all but stopped building restaurants in this state because approvals and permits for establishing them can take up to two years, compared to as little as six weeks in Texas, and the cost to build one is $100,000 more than in Texas, where CKE is planning to open 300 new restaurants this decade.

CKE restaurants have 95 percent employee turnover in a year — not bad in this industry — and the health-care benefits under CKE’s current “mini-med” plans are capped in a way that makes them illegal under Obamacare. So CKE will have to convert many full-time employees to part-timers to limit the growth of its burdens under Obamacare.

In an economic climate of increasing uncertainties, Puzder says, one certainty is that many businesses now marginally profitable will disappear when Obamacare causes that margin to disappear. A second certainty is that “employers everywhere will be looking to reduce labor content in their business models as Obamacare makes employees unambiguously more expensive.”

According to the U.S. Small Business Administration, by 2008 the cost of federal regulations had reached $1.75 trillion. That was 14 percent of national income unavailable for job-creating investments. And that was more than 11,000 regulations ago.
.
.
.
Barack Obama has written that during his very brief sojourn in the private sector he felt like “a spy behind enemy lines.” Puzder knows what it feels like when gargantuan government is composed of multitudes of regulators who regard business as the enemy. And 22.9 million Americans who are unemployed, underemployed or too discouraged to look for employment know what it feels like to be collateral damage in the regulatory state’s war on business.
 
You want a few reasons why the US economy is sluggish? By this time, most economies have recovered and have experienced significant growth and more jobs after a recession is over. But not this time, and Mr Will talks about why.


Choking on Obamacare
By George F. Will, Published: December 2

In 1941, Carl Karcher was a 24-year-old truck driver for a bakery. Impressed by the large numbers of buns he was delivering, he scrounged up $326 to buy a hot dog cart across from a Goodyear plant. And the war came.

So did millions of defense industry workers and their cars. And, soon, Southern California’s contribution to American cuisine — fast food. Including, eventually, hundreds of Carl’s Jr. restaurants. Karcher died in 2008, but his legacy, CKE Restaurants, survives. It would thrive, says CEO Andy Puzder, but for government’s comprehensive campaign against job creation.

CKE, with more than 3,200 restaurants (Carl’s Jr. and Hardee’s), has created 70,000 jobs, 21,000 directly and 49,000 with franchisees. The growth of those numbers will be inhibited by — among many government measures — Obama*care.

When CKE’s health-care advisers, citing Obamacare’s complexities, opacities and uncertainties, said that it would add between $7.3 million and $35.1 million to the company’s $12 million health-care costs in 2010, Puzder said: I need a number I can plan with. They guessed $18 million — twice what CKE spent last year building new restaurants. Obamacare must mean fewer restaurants.

And therefore fewer jobs. Each restaurant creates, on average, 25 jobs — and as much as 3.5 times that number of jobs in the community. (CKE spends about $1 billion a year on food and paper products, $175 million on advertising, $33 million on maintenance, etc.)

Puzder laughs about the liberal theory that businesses are not investing because they want to “punish Obama.” Rising health-care costs are, he says, just one uncertainty inhibiting expansion. Others are government policies raising fuel costs, which infect everything from air conditioning to the cost (including deliveries) of supplies, and the threat that the National Labor Relations Board will use regulations to impose something like “card check” in place of secret-ballot unionization elections.

CKE has about 720 California restaurants, in which 84 percent of the managers are minorities and 67 percent are women. CKE has, however, all but stopped building restaurants in this state because approvals and permits for establishing them can take up to two years, compared to as little as six weeks in Texas, and the cost to build one is $100,000 more than in Texas, where CKE is planning to open 300 new restaurants this decade.

CKE restaurants have 95 percent employee turnover in a year — not bad in this industry — and the health-care benefits under CKE’s current “mini-med” plans are capped in a way that makes them illegal under Obamacare. So CKE will have to convert many full-time employees to part-timers to limit the growth of its burdens under Obamacare.

In an economic climate of increasing uncertainties, Puzder says, one certainty is that many businesses now marginally profitable will disappear when Obamacare causes that margin to disappear. A second certainty is that “employers everywhere will be looking to reduce labor content in their business models as Obamacare makes employees unambiguously more expensive.”

According to the U.S. Small Business Administration, by 2008 the cost of federal regulations had reached $1.75 trillion. That was 14 percent of national income unavailable for job-creating investments. And that was more than 11,000 regulations ago.
.
.
.
Barack Obama has written that during his very brief sojourn in the private sector he felt like “a spy behind enemy lines.” Puzder knows what it feels like when gargantuan government is composed of multitudes of regulators who regard business as the enemy. And 22.9 million Americans who are unemployed, underemployed or too discouraged to look for employment know what it feels like to be collateral damage in the regulatory state’s war on business.

I happen to agree with George Will. I don't think employers should be the ones providing healthcare coverage. It is inefficient and not in their best interests

That's why we need government to step in and fill the role formerly conducted by employers.....provide an option for low cost healthcare

Or we could do what conservatives advocate......tell everyone to go fuck themselves. "Let them die"
 
The Federal Government grew exponentially during FDR's new deal which occurred coincidentally at the same time as the twelve year Great Depression. The first thing Obama did upon entering office was to redistribute a trillion dollars of taxpayer monies to his friends and supporters. The next thing he did was to seize one sixth of the American economy with Obamacare.
The Government reported a unexpectedly large drop in the unemployment rate last month caused by the creation of only 120,000 new jobs, but more probably due to 300,000 people simply stopped looking for work. They're hiding the Obama caused Second Great Depression through smoke and mirrors.
 
When CKE’s health-care advisers, citing Obamacare’s complexities, opacities and uncertainties, said that it would add between $7.3 million and $35.1 million to the company’s $12 million health-care costs in 2010, Puzder said: I need a number I can plan with.

Annual health care costs of $12 million for 70,000 people?
 
If the people in this country are stupid enough to re-elect Obama and let the healthcare issue survive, then I pity the young, for their future will be one of squalor and misery. The thing is they are so ignorant that they won't relize that they did it to themselves.
 
I won't vote for him cause he is a liberal piece of shit. He draws flies.
 
  • Thanks
Reactions: 007
Obama is the president, leader of the Executive branch of the government.

Congress is the legislative branch of the government, and I believe they are the ones who make laws. They are called "lawmakers" after all. It's what we send them there to do, so if they are not making new laws every day, they aren't doing their jobs. Regulation is passed in the form of laws, a new regulation is a new law. When the Democrats run the Senate and the House they are passing their forms of regulation. When the Republicans are in charge they pass their form of regulation. No matter who runs the House or Senate laws are being made and regulations put into place, it is the nature of the position.

If we truly want to limit regulation we need to limit the time the congress is in session, the least time they are there the fewer regulations the can put into place. With the exception of the presidential veto Obama has little to do with regulations save to say yea or nay.

I will not be voting for Obama, as I feel he is not showing enough progress in the right direction. I am not thrilled with any of the Republican front runners. It looks like Paul will get my vote, barring his death, god forbid.

As a side note. When GWB was president, I started out with Blue Cross and Blue Shield with no Co-Pay for me and my family. It was just medical with no dental or optical. Every year the coverage became worse and worse. When GWB left office I was the only one my employer would cover because the co-pay for the rest of my family would eat over half my weekly take home pay. I just couldn't afford that, I need to make the house payment. In Obamas first term there was no improvement to my medical situation. When Obamacare was passed my employer limited my coverage to two doctor visits a year plus one physical, and then told us it was Obamas fault for Obama care. This I feel was disingenuous, and ,meant to sway the employees political position.
 
My grandparents didn't have healthcare and they prospered through the depression and fought WWII. The world doesn't owe you anything and the tyrannical government owes you even less. People need to become more self sufficient and most importantly get off their fat asses and do the things that will allow them to be healthier in later life instead of becoming a financial drain like the entitlement crazed boomer generation.
 
Spectrum, Obama had a lot to do with the success ( or philisophical failure) of Health Care reform. During the elongated year he was over zealous in his mandate of the reform. During this time he made a multitude number of Speeches on the matter but less than few on the economy. Once he had Pelosi hide in her quarters with her comrades writing the bill, they gave no time for the legislature to read the darn thing. Just "Do the right thing and pass the damn thing, Then we'll find out what's in it."

You may be naive when it comes how much power he yields on the success or failure of bills and Super Committees.
 
  • Thanks
Reactions: kaz
Obama is the president, leader of the Executive branch of the government.

Congress is the legislative branch of the government, and I believe they are the ones who make laws. They are called "lawmakers" after all. It's what we send them there to do, so if they are not making new laws every day, they aren't doing their jobs. Regulation is passed in the form of laws, a new regulation is a new law. When the Democrats run the Senate and the House they are passing their forms of regulation. When the Republicans are in charge they pass their form of regulation. No matter who runs the House or Senate laws are being made and regulations put into place, it is the nature of the position.

If we truly want to limit regulation we need to limit the time the congress is in session, the least time they are there the fewer regulations the can put into place. With the exception of the presidential veto Obama has little to do with regulations save to say yea or nay.

I will not be voting for Obama, as I feel he is not showing enough progress in the right direction. I am not thrilled with any of the Republican front runners. It looks like Paul will get my vote, barring his death, god forbid.

As a side note. When GWB was president, I started out with Blue Cross and Blue Shield with no Co-Pay for me and my family. It was just medical with no dental or optical. Every year the coverage became worse and worse. When GWB left office I was the only one my employer would cover because the co-pay for the rest of my family would eat over half my weekly take home pay. I just couldn't afford that, I need to make the house payment. In Obamas first term there was no improvement to my medical situation. When Obamacare was passed my employer limited my coverage to two doctor visits a year plus one physical, and then told us it was Obamas fault for Obama care. This I feel was disingenuous, and ,meant to sway the employees political position.

Tissue?
 
  • Thanks
Reactions: kaz
When CKE’s health-care advisers, citing Obamacare’s complexities, opacities and uncertainties, said that it would add between $7.3 million and $35.1 million to the company’s $12 million health-care costs in 2010, Puzder said: I need a number I can plan with.

Annual health care costs of $12 million for 70,000 people?


Thet're saying HC costs would go up about $171.43 per person, do you find that to be an unreasonable assessment? Actually, since much of ObamaCare's rules and policies are yet to be determined, it's just a guess. Pretty hard to tell IMO, so laong with the other unknows like taxes and energy costs, how can most businesses determine whether or not to invest more money and hire more people?

Which leads me back to Obama, chances are that however it shakes out will not be to the advantage of businesses large and small. Probably more to the large than small, which is odd cuz it's the small businesses that create the most new jobs. It's like he's doing the opposite of what he says he wants.
 
There are many reasons for rising healthcare cost. Government may add to cost but it is not the major reason for rising costs. Fee for service and technological advances are far more important factors.
 
Spectrum, Obama had a lot to do with the success ( or philisophical failure) of Health Care reform. During the elongated year he was over zealous in his mandate of the reform. During this time he made a multitude number of Speeches on the matter but less than few on the economy. Once he had Pelosi hide in her quarters with her comrades writing the bill, they gave no time for the legislature to read the darn thing. Just "Do the right thing and pass the damn thing, Then we'll find out what's in it."

You may be naive when it comes how much power he yields on the success or failure of bills and Super Committees.

It was the Senate bill and they had weeks to look at it. Pelosi was referring to brainwashed dupes like you, who listen to the Pub Propaganda network and have NO CLUE what's in the bill.
 
There are many reasons for rising healthcare cost. Government may add to cost but it is not the major reason for rising costs. Fee for service and technological advances are far more important factors.

bullshit.
 
There are many reasons for rising healthcare cost. Government may add to cost but it is not the major reason for rising costs. Fee for service and technological advances are far more important factors.

Yes and no.

Mandates have increased costs, no may about it.

Whats that term..........

Oh yeah ........Preexisting conditions? But it didnt start there. Technological I would agree is one of the bigger drivers.
 
When CKE’s health-care advisers, citing Obamacare’s complexities, opacities and uncertainties, said that it would add between $7.3 million and $35.1 million to the company’s $12 million health-care costs in 2010, Puzder said: I need a number I can plan with.

Annual health care costs of $12 million for 70,000 people?


Thet're saying HC costs would go up about $171.43 per person, do you find that to be an unreasonable assessment?

That's not what the sentence says. As it reads now, their current contribution to to employee health costs averages out to $170 per person per year: "it would add between $7.3 million and $35.1 million to the company’s $12 million health-care costs in 2010."

Which leads me back to Obama, chances are that however it shakes out will not be to the advantage of businesses large and small. Probably more to the large than small, which is odd cuz it's the small businesses that create the most new jobs. It's like he's doing the opposite of what he says he wants.

Small businesses gain access to SHOP exchanges, which can allow the employer to provide a defined contribution for use by the employee in finding the plan of her choice. If small employers want less uncertainty in their health costs, then allowing employees to take a defined contribution into the market and shop for their own plan would presumably be something they'd prefer over the current arrangement.
 

Forum List

Back
Top