Eagle wrote:
Interesting video I found from a small business owner's perspective:
[I cut the link here because I'm limited to 1 link per post]
Pretty hilarious. Not a single fact, figure, or example cited. She talks about the complexity of the system, comparing it to taxes. But does any of us avoid doing our taxes because of it's complexity? She cites conflicting regulations but doesn't give a single example of any conflicts in the regulations.
As per the original post in this thread, companies with fewer than 50 employees are exempt. Of the companies with more than 50 employees, more than 96% already provide benefits. We're talking 0.2% of employers being affected here.
And where in the law does it say that a company has to provide exactly the same healthcare coverage? I don't see anything like that in the text of the law. Do you? In fact, people will be able to go to exchanges and select what they want, paying extra for better benefits if they wish.
Will costs go up? Yes. Papa John's founder says that it will force the price of pizza to rise 11 to 14 cents per pizza and that they'll pass this cost to the customers (see earlier post in this thread). Frankly, I think the cost of pizza will go up more because the price of cheese will skyrocket as the drought causes the price of cattle feed to rise. Already, ranchers are sending their cattle to slaughter in order to get the best prices while their cattle still have some weight.
And you know what? It's appropriate for the cost of that healthcare to be passed on to Papa John's customers.
From a
piece on CNN:
Quote:
Part of what the act does is mandate that companies start providing health insurance to their employees or pay a penalty. Since some don't do that already, this will cost them money. They could take this out of profits or reduce the salaries of their executives, but they will probably do what every business does: They'll pass it on to the consumer.
This is as it should be. Some companies probably keep costs down by not providing comprehensive health benefits to their employees. Now, they will have to. I imagine some companies already do, which probably increases their costs, and now they will be on a more level playing field. Regardless, Papa John's is telling you that people who order its pizza will now bear the cost of its employees' health insurance.
Again -- as it should be! Should people who don't order Papa John's pizza have to pay for that insurance? That's what's happening now.
In 2004, for instance, more than half of Wal-Mart employees did not get health care coverage through their jobs. More than a quarter of children of Wal-Mart employees therefore got their insurance through Medicaid or SCHIP. That means Wal-Mart didn't pay for their health insurance; taxpayers did. Moreover, every time an uninsured employee had to go to an emergency department and receive uncompensated care, who paid for that? The rest of us.
You may believe that we, as a country, shouldn't pay for care for the uninsured. But most of us are unwilling to let the sick, especially children, suffer. So we -- individual Americans -- have been paying for this health care, saving those companies money, regardless of whether we availed ourselves of their services. No longer. Under the Affordable Care Act, those costs will be the responsibility of those businesses and eventually their customers.
Yeah, companies will have to pay for healthcare but most of them already do. And we the taxpayers have been subsidizing the companies who haven't provided healthcare for their employees. Now we won't have to pay for that any more. The cost will be borne by the companies and the costs will be passed to their customers directly instead all of us taxpayers. Is there something about this that bothers you?
