Welcome to your Green Bay Packers Online Community!

Since 2006, PackersHome has been providing a unique experience for fans.
Your participation is greatly anticipated!
Login or Register.
2 Pages12>
Options
View
Go to last post Go to first unread
Offline Pack93z  
#1 Posted : Thursday, March 28, 2013 12:34:45 PM(UTC)
Pack93z

Rank: Hall of Famer

PackersHome NFL Pick'em - Bronze: 2012

United States
Posts: 12,750
Joined: 3/16/2007(UTC)
Location: North Central Wisconsin

Applause Given: 380
Applause Received: 1,020

After all the posturing about the financial impact upon businesses and the potential to financial devastate them to the point of reducing services or staffing.. it appears that the impact is being scaled back substantially.

Now the doesn't mean the package is actually going to improve the quality of health care for the workers of this nation.. or make it more affordable or improve their coverage.. but it certainly will not impact the businesses like the fear mongering projected. Basically, the costs will be passed through to the workers that will either see a decline in actual coverage or a overall rise in individual costs. And many will, as notated, just accept the minimal fine and roll without.

But the angst that it is going to fundamentally hurt the business sector greatly.. that was and always will be overstated. Simply provide coverage that is not viable for most and pass the buck. Just now.. the government is more directly backing the gaps.


Quote:
Restaurant Chains Cut Estimates for Health-Law Costs

Restaurant owners have been fierce critics of the health-care overhaul law, fearing that its mandate for employers to offer insurance more broadly will drive up costs and deter hiring.

Now, some operators say the law may not be that costly after all. They say many employees won't qualify for coverage, and many of those who do qualify will decline company-offered insurance.

Wendy's Co. (WEN) initially estimated the health-care law would increase the cost of operating each of its 5,800 U.S. restaurants by $25,000 a year. But Chief Financial Officer Steve Hare told an investment conference on March 14 that executives have cut the estimate by 80%, to $5,000 a year, primarily because they expect many employees to decline the insurance offering.

"It is still going to be an additional cost that both the company and our franchisees will have to absorb, but we think it is going to be manageable," Mr. Hare said. A Wendy's spokesman said the company continues to refine its cost estimates and it would be "premature" to discuss them further.

Executives of other restaurant chains, including Chipotle Mexican Grill Inc. (CMG), Jack in the Box Inc. (JACK) and Popeye's Louisiana Kitchen, have offered similar cost estimates in recent months.

They say many employees will decline company-offered insurance, either because they can get insurance through Medicaid or a family member, or because they prefer to pay the penalty for not having health insurance. The penalty next year will be as low as $95 next year, much less than most employees will be asked to pay through company-sponsored insurance plans.

Edited by user Thursday, March 28, 2013 12:59:07 PM(UTC)  | Reason: Not specified

I think when there's enough will and aggression, there's no shortage of talent either.

UserPostedImage
Sponsor
Offline 4PackGirl  
#2 Posted : Thursday, March 28, 2013 4:51:01 PM(UTC)
4PackGirl

Rank: 1st Round Draft Pick

Posts: 2,252
Joined: 12/17/2006(UTC)
Location: illinois

Applause Given2: 150
Applause Received: 122

wow - that's quite a difference.

estimates are just that - estimates.

everybody running around with the 'sky is falling' mentality needs to take a deep breath!
UserPostedImage
Offline dhazer  
#3 Posted : Thursday, March 28, 2013 6:08:10 PM(UTC)
dhazer

Rank: Pro Bowl

FleaFlicker Fantasy Football - Silver: 2013Yahoo! Fantasy Football - Bronze: 2009PackersHome NFL Pick'em - Bronze: 2013

Posts: 3,897
Joined: 9/14/2008(UTC)

Applause Given: 45
Applause Received: 190

Originally Posted by: 4PackGirl Go to Quoted Post
wow - that's quite a difference.

estimates are just that - estimates.

everybody running around with the 'sky is falling' mentality needs to take a deep breath!


Did you miss this line


executives have cut the estimate by 80%, to $5,000 a year, primarily because they expect many employees to decline the insurance offering.


they will save money because employees won't take insurance.



UserPostedImage

Just Imagine this for the next 6-9 years. What a ride it will be :)
Offline Wade  
#4 Posted : Friday, March 29, 2013 9:20:37 AM(UTC)
Wade

Rank: All Pro

Posts: 5,762
Joined: 8/1/2009(UTC)
Location: nowhere of importance

Applause Given: 629
Applause Received: 647

Originally Posted by: Pack93z Go to Quoted Post
After all the posturing about the financial impact upon businesses and the potential to financial devastate them to the point of reducing services or staffing.. it appears that the impact is being scaled back substantially.

Now the doesn't mean the package is actually going to improve the quality of health care for the workers of this nation.. or make it more affordable or improve their coverage.. but it certainly will not impact the businesses like the fear mongering projected. Basically, the costs will be passed through to the workers that will either see a decline in actual coverage or a overall rise in individual costs. And many will, as notated, just accept the minimal fine and roll without.

But the angst that it is going to fundamentally hurt the business sector greatly.. that was and always will be overstated. Simply provide coverage that is not viable for most and pass the buck. Just now.. the government is more directly backing the gaps.





Er, no.

Big business won't be hurt as much as it claimed. Big business is rarely hurt much by big government. Big business can afford to spread the cost over millions of customers at a time. (An extra penny on a Wendy's burger is trivial to people who eat there.)

The business that will hurt will be small business. And remember, the great majority of businesses (99%+) are companies with less than 100 or so employees. Companies that don't have the luxury of spreading the costs out that way. Companies that are far closer to their individual margins than many think. Far closer.

There''ll always be jobs at the Wendy's of the world.

Heck, there's a good bet there will be more of them than ever.

Whether that is a good thing for the economy or not....well, it'll give us continued opportunities to complain about the unfairness of the gap between rich and poor, I suppose.

None of the above. It wouldn't have been a wasted vote. Obama and Romney -- Those were the wasted votes.
Offline Pack93z  
#5 Posted : Friday, March 29, 2013 9:35:52 AM(UTC)
Pack93z

Rank: Hall of Famer

PackersHome NFL Pick'em - Bronze: 2012

United States
Posts: 12,750
Joined: 3/16/2007(UTC)
Location: North Central Wisconsin

Applause Given: 380
Applause Received: 1,020

Originally Posted by: Wade Go to Quoted Post
Er, no.

Big business won't be hurt as much as it claimed. Big business is rarely hurt much by big government. Big business can afford to spread the cost over millions of customers at a time. (An extra penny on a Wendy's burger is trivial to people who eat there.)

The business that will hurt will be small business. And remember, the great majority of businesses (99%+) are companies with less than 100 or so employees. Companies that don't have the luxury of spreading the costs out that way. Companies that are far closer to their individual margins than many think. Far closer.

There''ll always be jobs at the Wendy's of the world.

Heck, there's a good bet there will be more of them than ever.

Whether that is a good thing for the economy or not....well, it'll give us continued opportunities to complain about the unfairness of the gap between rich and poor, I suppose.



I disagree... small businesses will employ the same tactics.. yes there will be a cost of actually providing the insurance (most already offer insurance to remain competitive in attracting employees).. and they will simply offer the minimum they can at a cost that most employees will reject and move on. Sure there will be an added cost of doing business... but hardly crippling.

Your making an assumption that many are not offering insurance already..

A really good friend of mine owns the small town grocery store with a staff of less than 12.. about 5 of those full time. They have been offering insurance for years, mostly because he covers himself (family) through the policy and offers it to his full time employees to have a sense of continuity in staffing. Plus it is the moral thing to do.. we have discussed this impact along with other trials over the last couple of years in the economy and increase in competition in places like Walmart coming into the market (albeit 15 miles away).

The costs were already there in terms of carrying insurance.. there was an increase in his carrying cost, but absorbed that in the next employee review cycle in terms of overall benefit to the employees.

Yes, the businesses have to become more wise and diligent in doing business in hiring employees.. 4 of his 5 take the insurance he offers.. the increase of cost was passed through. In the end.. the employee base is seeing the hit.. but they also have securing in employment as well.
I think when there's enough will and aggression, there's no shortage of talent either.

UserPostedImage
Offline Wade  
#6 Posted : Friday, March 29, 2013 9:47:22 AM(UTC)
Wade

Rank: All Pro

Posts: 5,762
Joined: 8/1/2009(UTC)
Location: nowhere of importance

Applause Given: 629
Applause Received: 647

We shall see. I hope you are correct and I am wrong.

Unfortunately, I fear the law of unintended consequences will frustrate your optimism.

But, as I said, I hope that optimism prevails.

We shall see.
None of the above. It wouldn't have been a wasted vote. Obama and Romney -- Those were the wasted votes.
Offline Pack93z  
#7 Posted : Friday, March 29, 2013 9:56:24 AM(UTC)
Pack93z

Rank: Hall of Famer

PackersHome NFL Pick'em - Bronze: 2012

United States
Posts: 12,750
Joined: 3/16/2007(UTC)
Location: North Central Wisconsin

Applause Given: 380
Applause Received: 1,020

Originally Posted by: Wade Go to Quoted Post
We shall see. I hope you are correct and I am wrong.

Unfortunately, I fear the law of unintended consequences will frustrate your optimism.

But, as I said, I hope that optimism prevails.

We shall see.


Me.. as I continue dig into this.. the true costs will ultimately be felt by most employees and back to state and federal governments.. thus it will trickle down to the taxpayers ultimately.. some in a double dip fashion. That is my fear.. couple that with inefficiencies and fraud potential at the government level.

There will be impacts at the small business level.. but not to the degree many have projected. Much like the article notes.
I think when there's enough will and aggression, there's no shortage of talent either.

UserPostedImage
Offline DakotaT  
#8 Posted : Friday, March 29, 2013 9:59:21 AM(UTC)
DakotaT

Rank: Super Bowl MVP

Posts: 7,243
Joined: 8/18/2008(UTC)

Applause Given: 622
Applause Received: 1,296

I live in a place where we have been unaffected by the recession in a way, shape, or form. So I have real problem with wealthy small business owners who don't offer a health care plan with an employee's compensation package, but said employers bitch about not being able to retain quality workers. Because of the oil boom, contractors have had to double wages they use to pay just to entice their workers to stay. The businesses around town aren't crying about providing health care so much as a lack of work force.

Romneycare will have a lot more good than bad when more and more people get the health screenings they use to avoid. Small businessmen will just have to get a little more creative with their budgets. Hell, maybe their income tax bill will go do if their bottom lines are a little more lean. A businessman with real sound ethics wants to provide health care to his employees; afterall, the employees make him what he is not the other way around.
UserPostedImage
Offline Wade  
#9 Posted : Friday, March 29, 2013 9:17:56 PM(UTC)
Wade

Rank: All Pro

Posts: 5,762
Joined: 8/1/2009(UTC)
Location: nowhere of importance

Applause Given: 629
Applause Received: 647

Originally Posted by: 4PackGirl Go to Quoted Post
wow - that's quite a difference.

estimates are just that - estimates.

everybody running around with the 'sky is falling' mentality needs to take a deep breath!
''

How about we just watch you and your signature take deep breaths instead? That sounds like a lot more fun.

(grin)
None of the above. It wouldn't have been a wasted vote. Obama and Romney -- Those were the wasted votes.
thanks Post received 1 applause.
4PackGirl on 3/30/2013(UTC)
Offline Wade  
#10 Posted : Friday, March 29, 2013 9:27:21 PM(UTC)
Wade

Rank: All Pro

Posts: 5,762
Joined: 8/1/2009(UTC)
Location: nowhere of importance

Applause Given: 629
Applause Received: 647

Originally Posted by: DakotaT Go to Quoted Post
I live in a place where we have been unaffected by the recession in a way, shape, or form. So I have real problem with wealthy small business owners who don't offer a health care plan with an employee's compensation package, but said employers bitch about not being able to retain quality workers. Because of the oil boom, contractors have had to double wages they use to pay just to entice their workers to stay. The businesses around town aren't crying about providing health care so much as a lack of work force.

Romneycare will have a lot more good than bad when more and more people get the health screenings they use to avoid. Small businessmen will just have to get a little more creative with their budgets. Hell, maybe their income tax bill will go do if their bottom lines are a little more lean. A businessman with real sound ethics wants to provide health care to his employees; afterall, the employees make him what he is not the other way around.



ARGH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

(cuing up Ronnie the Ray-gun)

"Gee, uh, there you go again."

Sometimes I wonder if your parents read Brave New World and had a tape recorder under your bed that played Sam Donaldson every night when you were sleeping.

I've already had too many long posts today, so I won't add another to the pile.

Just take my disagreement as given this time. :)





None of the above. It wouldn't have been a wasted vote. Obama and Romney -- Those were the wasted votes.
Offline dfosterf  
#11 Posted : Saturday, March 30, 2013 4:22:51 AM(UTC)
dfosterf

Rank: All Pro

United States
Posts: 5,868
Joined: 8/19/2008(UTC)

Applause Given: 168
Applause Received: 366

As I have stated elsewhere, Home Depot cut all of their part-time employees to under 29 hours per week.

The HEADLINES that the mass media put out- "Home Depot to add record number of jobs."

The part-timers were getting 40 hours per week, or very close to it, for months, with a sprinkling of hours reductions every two months or so in order to maintain the "part-time status" of those employees.

There are virtually no full time jobs available at the store level at any Home Depot. "Part time" status employees already made up 66% of the work force prior to this change.

You don't think that this is adversely impacting 10's of thousands of already under-employed workers? Most of those part-timers that had their hours cut are in fact already "under-employed."

Go into your local Home Depot. You will see that the associates on the floor are generally older (I would submit more far more savvy, as well) than your joeblow Walmart Kohls Sears salesperson.

You can blame Home Depot if you want, but that isn't the same as saying that Obamacare isn't impacting jobs, now is it?



UserPostedImage
damn skippy I'm an owner. I currently own a full .00001924537805515393 % of the Green Bay Packers.



Offline Pack93z  
#12 Posted : Saturday, March 30, 2013 5:47:32 AM(UTC)
Pack93z

Rank: Hall of Famer

PackersHome NFL Pick'em - Bronze: 2012

United States
Posts: 12,750
Joined: 3/16/2007(UTC)
Location: North Central Wisconsin

Applause Given: 380
Applause Received: 1,020

Originally Posted by: dfosterf Go to Quoted Post

You can blame Home Depot if you want, but that isn't the same as saying that Obamacare isn't impacting jobs, now is it?


I agree.. the costs of this program are not going to be felt by business America to a great deal... it will be passed through to the employees in some fashion.. and yes this is another way it will be passed. My point within the thread is all the gloom that it is going to cripple business, I just don't believe that it will.

Edited by user Saturday, March 30, 2013 5:17:18 PM(UTC)  | Reason: Not specified

I think when there's enough will and aggression, there's no shortage of talent either.

UserPostedImage
Offline texaspackerbacker  
#13 Posted : Saturday, March 30, 2013 6:20:22 AM(UTC)
texaspackerbacker

Rank: 1st Round Draft Pick

Yahoo! NCAA March Madness - Gold: 2014

United States
Posts: 2,527
Joined: 3/4/2013(UTC)
Location: Texas

Applause Given: 388
Applause Received: 224

The object of Obamacare is to drive people out of private health insurance and into a single-payer government system - socialized medicine as it used to be known. The huge cost increase to employers - even if it is 80% less than originally predicted - is their means to that end - that combined with the mandate forcing people to have some kind of health care coverage. Ultimately, they would like to run the private health insurance carriers out of business by making it too expensive to use them. The 80% decrease in employer cost is actually a sign their goal of moving to the single-payer thing is working because the reason for the decrease is employees choosing that lesser of two evils.

At the risk of sounding like one of "them" - the social democrats, as wade has termed them, I have to say "they" are winning the hearts and minds on this issue. "They" would like by a generation from now for Obamacare - actually its planned successor, complete single-payer coverage - to be as widely accepted as Social Security and Medicare. I think that will happen, and I'm not so sure it is a bad thing. Based on the last election, our side has picked the wrong issue to be a battleground here.
Expressing the Good Normal Views of Good Normal Americans.
If Anything I Say Smacks of Extremism, Please Tell Me EXACTLY What.
Offline 4PackGirl  
#14 Posted : Saturday, March 30, 2013 2:23:29 PM(UTC)
4PackGirl

Rank: 1st Round Draft Pick

Posts: 2,252
Joined: 12/17/2006(UTC)
Location: illinois

Applause Given2: 150
Applause Received: 122

Originally Posted by: Wade Go to Quoted Post
''

How about we just watch you and your signature take deep breaths instead? That sounds like a lot more fun.

(grin)



hey whatever it takes. you guys are a bunch of bitches here lately. if i need to start sexing the place up to improve the attitude here, i'll do it!

UserPostedImage
Offline dfosterf  
#15 Posted : Monday, June 24, 2013 11:36:02 AM(UTC)
dfosterf

Rank: All Pro

United States
Posts: 5,868
Joined: 8/19/2008(UTC)

Applause Given: 168
Applause Received: 366

Update.


I am one of the 11 part-time associates at my Home Depot that is exempt from the 29 hour work week restriction. I get the 40 I always used to, with the same reduction periodically to maintain my "part-time" status. I have been told that Home Depot will not be fined for me. The other 130 + - are not given more than 29 hours per week.

Home Depot shit-canned the bulk of the massive number of associates they hired in April and March, mostly for my department. (Lawn/Garden/Seasonal).


Loaders, waterers- [70,000 plants- daily- big, big job, we NEVER get a handle on] . freight, Garden recovery (It's a 24 hr/7days a week/ 365 days of year kind of place---"working warehouse")

"Seasonal employment"

They never hired anything approaching what they hired this year, and most of the time in the past, they found a hole for them elsewhere in the store, if they were worth a fuck.

Not this year. It was brutal.

THEN, after shit-canning these people, I walk in back from vacation. I ask this very attractive young lady in outside garden if I can help her. She says, "No, I'm following Dennis around." I don't know what that means, until about a minute later I see a scary-looking-old-guy FNG wearing an orange apron that looks like the professor from the movie "Back to the future" had the professor been doing some serious drugs. The dude is OUT of it. I made the mistake of handing him the blower I was using when a customer needed my assistance. This is how I met him, no words exchanged. I didn't know, but should have, in retrospect, lol- Crazy fuck with a blower- you should have been there, lol He decided that a good use for that blower was to blow the mulch and dirt completely out of the pot of a 189.00 Japanese Maple. I suspected there were issues at that point, lol. COMPLETELY WORTHLESS. I don't want to sound harsh, but this is a business, a big one, and 70,000 plants need water. He probably got 500 of them today, as I type this on a day off.


SHE is his interpreter. SHE is a college-educated, certified, nurse-whatever whose ENTIRE sad job is to walk around the outside garden department while this nut-job waters. I tell her what I need Dennis to do, she explains it so he can understand. She's a social worker or somesuchshit, not paid by the Home Depot--she shops. Paid by YOU, as a taxpayer. Remember, this dude (and her) just cost some guy/gal their JOB.

Nice.

Edited by user Monday, June 24, 2013 12:45:46 PM(UTC)  | Reason: Not specified

UserPostedImage
damn skippy I'm an owner. I currently own a full .00001924537805515393 % of the Green Bay Packers.



Rss Feed 
Users browsing this topic
Guest
2 Pages12>
Forum Jump  
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.

Notification

Icon
Error



Recent Topics
2h / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

2h / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

2h / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

5h / Around The NFL / Dexter_Sinister

6h / Green Bay Packers Talk / nerdmann

10h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

10h / Random Babble / Pack93z

10h / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

23-Jul / Random Babble / DakotaT

22-Jul / Green Bay Packers Talk / DakotaT

22-Jul / Fantasy Sports Talk / Zero2Cool

22-Jul / Green Bay Packers Talk / Wade

22-Jul / Green Bay Packers Talk / Dulak

22-Jul / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

22-Jul / Random Babble / dhazer


Tweeter

Copyright © 2006-2014 PackersHome.com™. All Rights Reserved.