Pack93z
  • Pack93z
  • Select Member Topic Starter
11 years ago
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.


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.


"The oranges are dry; the apples are mealy; and the papayas... I don't know what's going on with the papayas!"
4PackGirl
11 years ago
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!
dhazer
11 years ago

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!

Originally Posted by: 4PackGirl 



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.




Just Imagine this for the next 6-9 years. What a ride it will be 🙂 (PS, Zero should charge for this)
UserPostedImage
Wade
  • Wade
  • Veteran Member
11 years ago

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.


Originally Posted by: Pack93z 




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.


And do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, that you may prove what is that good and acceptable and perfect will of God.
Romans 12:2 (NKJV)
Pack93z
  • Pack93z
  • Select Member Topic Starter
11 years ago

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.

Originally Posted by: Wade 



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.
"The oranges are dry; the apples are mealy; and the papayas... I don't know what's going on with the papayas!"
Wade
  • Wade
  • Veteran Member
11 years ago
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.
And do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, that you may prove what is that good and acceptable and perfect will of God.
Romans 12:2 (NKJV)
Pack93z
  • Pack93z
  • Select Member Topic Starter
11 years ago

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.

Originally Posted by: Wade 



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.
"The oranges are dry; the apples are mealy; and the papayas... I don't know what's going on with the papayas!"
DakotaT
11 years ago
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
Wade
  • Wade
  • Veteran Member
11 years ago

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!

Originally Posted by: 4PackGirl 

''

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

(grin)
And do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, that you may prove what is that good and acceptable and perfect will of God.
Romans 12:2 (NKJV)
Wade
  • Wade
  • Veteran Member
11 years ago

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.

Originally Posted by: DakotaT 




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. :)






And do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, that you may prove what is that good and acceptable and perfect will of God.
Romans 12:2 (NKJV)
Users browsing this topic
    Fan Shout
    dfosterf (15h) : Maybe
    Mucky Tundra (16h) : Yes
    Zero2Cool (17h) : No.
    Mucky Tundra (19h) : End of a Degu-era
    dhazer (20h) : Steelers sign Patterson because of new kickoff rule interesting
    Zero2Cool (22h) : Former #Packers TE Josiah Deguara is signing a 1-year deal with the Jaguars, per source.
    Zero2Cool (23h) : They do not do it for "content sake".
    dfosterf (28-Mar) : For the record, I enjoy Beast and Mucky drafts
    Zero2Cool (27-Mar) : Haha
    Mucky Tundra (27-Mar) : No time for talking! Back to work beast!
    beast (27-Mar) : You saw only 4,201 of my mocks? 🥺 I think that means you missed more than half of them 😢
    dfosterf (27-Mar) : Does anyone know what Lambeau field improvements got put on hold? My guess would be for the 2025 draft
    Zero2Cool (27-Mar) : It's like listen, you made 4,201 mocks, no shit.
    Zero2Cool (27-Mar) : Cuz during the draft "I had them mocked there!" as if it's amazing.
    Zero2Cool (27-Mar) : They're fun to do once in awhile. It's people who think they are "content" that annoy me.
    dfosterf (27-Mar) : Against tbd
    dfosterf (27-Mar) : Answer to your question is yes, it's a Thursday, will be the Chiefs aga
    dfosterf (27-Mar) : Luckily for all concerned, I don't post them. I did one, but that was like 25 mocks ago
    Zero2Cool (27-Mar) : NFL 2024 gonna start Sept 5th isn't it???
    Zero2Cool (27-Mar) : Ugh... kids these days!
    dfosterf (27-Mar) : I'm gonna go do some more mock draft hell instead 🤪
    Zero2Cool (27-Mar) : Did we do one of those prediction threads yet for 2024 season?
    dfosterf (27-Mar) : In my city, they are playing the nimby game, in order to keep some railroad tracks vs. 2 professional sports teams and a concert venue.
    dfosterf (27-Mar) : And/Or a city council, of which I haven't seen a good one in a very long time
    dfosterf (27-Mar) : That sounds like a Mayor, not a city.
    buckeyepackfan (26-Mar) : Packers halt scheduled 80mil upgrade of stadium until lease agreement talks are restarted
    Zero2Cool (26-Mar) : City of Green Bay puts Packers' Lambeau Field lease talks on hold
    buckeyepackfan (26-Mar) : Packers 1 of 3 teams to vote no on new kickoff rule.
    Zero2Cool (26-Mar) : Packers sign another Kicker
    dfosterf (26-Mar) : Lengthy explanation at PFF if you click the link
    dfosterf (26-Mar) : Kickoff rules officially changed.ngthy explan
    Zero2Cool (26-Mar) : lol
    Cheesey (26-Mar) : 2009? No thanks! One open heart surgery is enough!
    dfosterf (26-Mar) : Good for you!
    Zero2Cool (26-Mar) : Yes. That's the one.
    dfosterf (26-Mar) : Is that "Lady Dugan" per chance?
    dfosterf (26-Mar) : Crystal?
    dfosterf (26-Mar) : Please refresh my memory
    Zero2Cool (26-Mar) : Alan posts. Crystal back in my life. It's 2009 all over again! Lol
    Mucky Tundra (26-Mar) : BAH GAWD! THAT'S CHEESEYS MUSIC!
    Zero2Cool (25-Mar) : Gutekunst said early stages of Jordan Love contract being discussed.
    Zero2Cool (25-Mar) : Shouldn't be penalized cuz official screwed up
    Zero2Cool (25-Mar) : Yeah, challenge until you are incorrect twice.
    Zero2Cool (25-Mar) : Fining them is the goal, per the people who made the rule anyway.
    dfosterf (25-Mar) : Still waiting on the kickoff rule changes. Did hear yesterday that the touchback proposal will now be the 30 yard line, not the 35
    dfosterf (25-Mar) : Probably speed of game issues with your proposal
    dfosterf (25-Mar) : Hopefully the refs don't get in the habit of throwing flags on this
    beast (25-Mar) : I think when it comes to Challenges should get two strikes, so unlimited challenges as long as they keep winning them, but 2 wrong then done
    dfosterf (25-Mar) : Still subject to the fines etc
    dfosterf (25-Mar) : Yes, I should have been more specific. Also, they are now saying it would be a 15 yard penalty. That makes more sense .
    Please sign in to use Fan Shout
    2023 Packers Schedule
    Sunday, Sep 10 @ 3:25 PM
    Bears
    Sunday, Sep 17 @ 12:00 PM
    Falcons
    Sunday, Sep 24 @ 12:00 PM
    SAINTS
    Thursday, Sep 28 @ 7:15 PM
    LIONS
    Monday, Oct 9 @ 7:15 PM
    Raiders
    Sunday, Oct 22 @ 3:25 PM
    Broncos
    Sunday, Oct 29 @ 12:00 PM
    VIKINGS
    Sunday, Nov 5 @ 12:00 PM
    RAMS
    Sunday, Nov 12 @ 12:00 PM
    Steelers
    Sunday, Nov 19 @ 12:00 PM
    CHARGERS
    Thursday, Nov 23 @ 11:30 AM
    Lions
    Sunday, Dec 3 @ 7:20 PM
    CHIEFS
    Monday, Dec 11 @ 7:15 PM
    Giants
    Sunday, Dec 17 @ 12:00 PM
    BUCCANEERS
    Sunday, Dec 24 @ 12:00 PM
    Panthers
    Sunday, Dec 31 @ 7:20 PM
    Vikings
    Sunday, Jan 7 @ 3:25 PM
    BEARS
    Sunday, Jan 14 @ 3:30 PM
    Cowboys
    Saturday, Jan 20 @ 7:15 PM
    49ers
    Recent Topics
    46m / Around The NFL / Zero2Cool

    15h / Green Bay Packers Talk / buckeyepackfan

    28-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / dfosterf

    28-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / bboystyle

    27-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

    27-Mar / Random Babble / Zero2Cool

    27-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

    26-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

    26-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

    26-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / bboystyle

    25-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

    25-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

    24-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

    24-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

    22-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

    Headlines
    Copyright © 2006 - 2024 PackersHome.com™. All Rights Reserved.