Choking on Obamacare

zsdersw

Lifer
Oct 29, 2003
10,505
2
0
http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/choking-on-obamacare/2011/12/02/gIQAKDCXMO_story.html

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.

Seventy years ago, the local health department complained that Karcher’s hot dog cart had no restroom facilities. He got help from a nearby gas station. A state agency made him pay $15 for workers’ compensation insurance. Another agency said that he owed more than the $326 cost of the cart in back sales taxes. For $100, a lawyer successfully argued that Karcher did not because his customers ate their hot dogs off the premises.

Time was, American businesses could surmount such regulatory officiousness. But government’s metabolic urge to boss people around has grown exponentially and today CKE’s California restaurants are governed by 57 categories of regulations. One compels employees and even managers to take breaks during the busiest hours, lest one of California’s 200,000 lawyers comes trolling for business at the expense of business.


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.

Another failure induced by Obamacare and over-regulation.
 
Last edited:

Gunslinger08

Lifer
Nov 18, 2001
13,234
2
81
Random question: Does anyone know of any studies on what health care and insurance costs will be in 30-40 years? Seems like they go up a ridiculous amount (20%?) each year, which isn't exactly sustainable. If that number if anywhere close to correct, how is health care going to be funded in 2050?
 

Hayabusa Rider

Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
Jan 26, 2000
50,879
4,268
126
Random question: Does anyone know of any studies on what health care and insurance costs will be in 30-40 years? Seems like they go up a ridiculous amount (20%?) each year, which isn't exactly sustainable. If that number if anywhere close to correct, how is health care going to be funded in 2050?

Don't ask those kinds of questions. That's bad form here.
 

Genx87

Lifer
Apr 8, 2002
41,091
513
126
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.

According to some that doesnt hurt business and their ability to expand.
 

zsdersw

Lifer
Oct 29, 2003
10,505
2
0
According to some that doesnt hurt business and their ability to expand.

Yes, and those same people would also say that all of the regulations imposed are necessary.

The truth be damned, I guess.
 

Genx87

Lifer
Apr 8, 2002
41,091
513
126
Yes, and those same people would also say that all of the regulations imposed are necessary.

The truth be damned, I guess.

I would go even further and say some of them have gone on record as claiming it would be a job creator as paper pushers would need to be hired.

Unbelievable in my opinion.
 

Paul98

Diamond Member
Jan 31, 2010
3,732
199
106
So how many employees are under this insurance plan that 12mil is being paid a year for? Because 12 mil sounds like almost nothing is being spent for health insurance to begin with.

Why is it that costing more in health insurance will mean that fewer new restaurants are opened? Will they make less money if they don't open them?
 

Paul98

Diamond Member
Jan 31, 2010
3,732
199
106
The problem we have right now is that the regulations that are needed, most aren't effective, or don't prevent what they are supposed to. And we don't remove regulations that aren't needed or are shown to not work.
 

woolfe9999

Diamond Member
Mar 28, 2005
7,153
0
0
Yet another assault on the concept of regulation based on the statements of the people who do not want to be regulated because it cuts in to their profits, and of course, the purposes and benefits of the regulations are short shrifted, if discussed at all. But then, it's George Will, so I wouldn't expect a more balanced approach.
 

JSt0rm

Lifer
Sep 5, 2000
27,399
3,948
126
i dont know about any of that other stuff but workers comp is good for business. You see with workers comp in place workers are unable to sue business if they get hurt on the job. Thats worth a few bucks.
 

zsdersw

Lifer
Oct 29, 2003
10,505
2
0
Yet another assault on the concept of regulation based on the statements of the people who do not want to be regulated because it cuts in to their profits, and of course, the purposes and benefits of the regulations are short shrifted, if discussed at all. But then, it's George Will, so I wouldn't expect a more balanced approach.

I find it very implausible that all or even most of the regulations imposed on business are either necessary or would pass a cost-benefit analysis.
 

the DRIZZLE

Platinum Member
Sep 6, 2007
2,956
1
81
Yet another assault on the concept of regulation based on the statements of the people who do not want to be regulated because it cuts in to their profits, and of course, the purposes and benefits of the regulations are short shrifted, if discussed at all. But then, it's George Will, so I wouldn't expect a more balanced approach.

The burden is on the government to justify why regulation is needed not the other way around.
 

Ausm

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
25,213
14
81
This bashing The Affordable Care Act thread makes me think of the other day when my Oldman came up to me and said "Wow I am saving a ton of money on my prescription drugs" Medicare has this new provision where when you hit the doughnut hold then your meds gets a 50% discount.

I said that's awesome Dad but enjoy it while you can.

He said"But why is that son?"

I said aren't you following the GOP debates?

He said "No not really son."

I said everyone one of them has sworn to totally Repeal the Affordable Health Care Act."

He said" Is that Obama care? Why should I give a shit about that?

I said "Well that's why you are getting that sweet discount on meds and you doughnut hole is slowly closing"

He said nothing an walked away....another bummed out Rabid Republican with a reality check.
 

jstern01

Senior member
Mar 25, 2010
532
0
71
Random question: Does anyone know of any studies on what health care and insurance costs will be in 30-40 years? Seems like they go up a ridiculous amount (20%?) each year, which isn't exactly sustainable. If that number if anywhere close to correct, how is health care going to be funded in 2050?

This link might give you some insight, now the report was from before the AHCA was passed, so we do not have any idea if the AHCA will slow or increase the rate. But sans the AHCA, this is what you might be looking at.

http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/89xx/doc8947/MainText.3.1.shtml
 

woolfe9999

Diamond Member
Mar 28, 2005
7,153
0
0
The burden is on the government to justify why regulation is needed not the other way around.

I never said otherwise, but who says the government hasn't met that burden? There is all kinds of data out there, from the CBO, from the regulatory agencies themselves, from independent studies, etc. about the cost-benefit of various regulations. To editorialize by discussing only the cost and ignoring the benefit side, let alone basing the "cost" analysis on anecdotal statements from those who have a direct financial interest in not being regulated, is disengenuous at best.
 

DesiPower

Lifer
Nov 22, 2008
15,299
740
126
Think about it this way, now atleast the jobs that will be created or exist will have healthcare. These hard working Americans will for the first time in the History of America will have America Health Insurance. They will be better off. They wont have to worry about loosing their job coz they are sick, or not dieing from sickness coz they didnt get treated on time.
The remainder of the people who didn't get a job coz they restaurants were never created, well.. they are just apply of the new shovel ready or green energy jobs. Not everyone needs to work in the food industry. They can go to technical college and get trained or something now since they have all the time in the world.
 

woolfe9999

Diamond Member
Mar 28, 2005
7,153
0
0
I find it very implausible that all or even most of the regulations imposed on business are either necessary or would pass a cost-benefit analysis.

I never said they all do, but George Will is not supplying any such analysis. He is providing only one side of the story, and even there he is using a sole source and one who is a financially interested party.
 

dank69

Lifer
Oct 6, 2009
37,356
32,985
136
Another agency said that he owed more than the $326 cost of the cart in back sales taxes. For $100, a lawyer successfully argued that Karcher did not because his customers ate their hot dogs off the premises.

Excuse my ignorance, but how did the lawyer win this argument? o_O
 

ElFenix

Elite Member
Super Moderator
Mar 20, 2000
102,402
8,574
126
I never said they all do, but George Will is not supplying any such analysis. He is providing only one side of the story, and even there he is using a sole source and one who is a financially interested party.

who isn't a financially interested party?
 

BoberFett

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
37,562
9
81
Excuse my ignorance, but how did the lawyer win this argument? o_O

Who knows exactly what the laws were way back then, but I would imagine it has something to do with the difference in sales tax between groceries and restaurants. Perhaps he somehow argued that because they weren't eating at the cart that it didn't have to pay some kind of restaurant sales tax?
 

dank69

Lifer
Oct 6, 2009
37,356
32,985
136
Who knows exactly what the laws were way back then, but I would imagine it has something to do with the difference in sales tax between groceries and restaurants. Perhaps he somehow argued that because they weren't eating at the cart that it didn't have to pay some kind of restaurant sales tax?
Oh, heh, 70 years ago. :p
 

werepossum

Elite Member
Jul 10, 2006
29,873
463
126
Spot-on story. Even Republicans after a few years in Congress believe that government is the answer to every problem and should be involved in every facet of our lives. Even worse, the really big corporations have the money and lobbyists and connections to get their own exemptions, so the people that REALLY need regulation are the ones most likely to legally escape it.

Obamacare is merely the latest mega-incarnation of this disease.
 

theeedude

Lifer
Feb 5, 2006
35,787
6,197
126
Health care costs have been rising in excess of inflation while GOP was in power, long before Obama care. Of course businesses like this could freeload off taxpayers by not providing their employees with coverage and having hospitals saddled with unpaid bills. Republicans were fine with that, because that's freedom. Freedom to saddle others with your externalities while reaping all the benefits is a fundamental belief of the GOP.
 

Genx87

Lifer
Apr 8, 2002
41,091
513
126
Health care costs have been rising in excess of inflation while GOP was in power, long before Obama care. Of course businesses like this could freeload off taxpayers by not providing their employees with coverage and having hospitals saddled with unpaid bills. Republicans were fine with that, because that's freedom. Freedom to saddle others with your externalities while reaping all the benefits is a fundamental belief of the GOP.

Healthcare costs have been rising faster than inflation for 50 years.

And what do you think a single payer system is but allowing business to free load off the tax payer the costs of medical insurance? I find it amusing you are complaining about business freeloading when you propose a system that would remove the cost of health care insurance from business all together and allowing them to reap the externalities without the cost.
 

JS80

Lifer
Oct 24, 2005
26,271
7
81
So how many employees are under this insurance plan that 12mil is being paid a year for? Because 12 mil sounds like almost nothing is being spent for health insurance to begin with.

Why is it that costing more in health insurance will mean that fewer new restaurants are opened? Will they make less money if they don't open them?

Businesses are not the government that can just print money at will. Businesses operate under budgets. If the financial planning for the following year budget called for $100 million cash investment to open 10 stores, and the government passed a law causing your expenses to rise by $20 million, then you now have $80 million to invest in 8 new stores. This is a very simple illustration.