Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
There is a look back period that will be used to determine if an employee has worked more or less than 30 hours per week. Based on that result, the employer will or will not be required to provide healthcare. The period is either 3 or 12 months, but I don't know how it's determined which one is used for any particular business.
Next time, try googling something before you make a complete fool of yourself. I can't believe what passes for debate these days. It's like we have a group of kindergarteners all saying that their dad can beat up the other person's dad. At what point do people grow up??
The point is that all businesses subject to this tax will not pay it, their customers will. Some, like this business owner, will be candid about it. Others will raise prices, cut hours, cut staff, serve smaller portions, or use cheaper ingredients, or some combination thereof and just not say anything.
Denny's did not invoke a surcharge, Metz (the owner of a number of Denny's) did for only his specific franchises. Those are important necessary distinctions.
So, why does his staff need Obamacare, is he that bad of a boss? Doesn't he provide a good healthcare option for them? Or does he just not care about that part of his business. If you can't afford to properly run a business you have no business having one. Is that what this is really about?
He should be happy for Obamacare. It doesn't sound like he can afford to care for his own employees. Looks like under the care of republicans he'd have no business at all. He obviously can't afford it.
He shouldn't be worried about "caring for" his employees. His employees should't be looking for him to "care for them." The relationship should be a simple one of work for pay. What an employee buys with the payment received for his labor, and whether that employee can buy all the things he wants, should not be concern of the employer. Government should have no ability to mandate that any employer pay any particular rate or use any particular method of compensation to it's employees.
Because "probably" in a sentence means "definitely factually true".
And because the fact that the CEO makes 2.3mil rather than 50 completely invalidates her underlying point.
But her point was invalid from the beginning seeing as the CEO for Denny's hasn't actually done anything like this, its only a franchise owner.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.