Why are small businesses now saying they have to lay people off?

[Stuckinthebush]

This seriously pisses me off.

I've heard this from friend, family members and acquaintances who have small businesses - they have to fire people now that Obama was re-elected.

I try to tell them that this is idiotic. What possibly could happen under a Romney presidency that would make your small business so much more profitable? Child labor?

The common answer? Obamacare!

Bullshit.

Under the ACA, small businesses under 25 employees get a 35% credit for insurance coverage which goes UP to 50% in 2014.

The exchanges will allow for employers to shop for employee coverage to find the lowest premiums they can.

The fact that small businesses have to think about covering employees now is a good thing for society - and the small businesses.

My retort to my brother in law, sister and a friend I spoke to about this was:

"If you want employers to see reduced costs for health care coverage and reduced responsibility for administration of health coverage for employees, then fight with me for a single payer system."

[Marrah_G]

1. What is ridicullous is that healthcare is tied to employers at all

This could all be avoided if our party would make a serious push for single payor and really sell it to the public.

[Stuckinthebush]

2. Agreed

Perhaps they can parlay this anger towards ACA into a push for universal coverage. You would think that corporations would be all for that.

[former-republican]

9. This is the only correct answer in this thread

"What is ridiculous is that health care is tied to employers at all"


and what the President SHOULD have said all along

This is a bad bill and it will backfire on us watch and see

[spanone]

12. we will watch and see and i predict you will be wrong.

[former-republican]

17. I don't like to be proven wrong but in this case I hope you are right

This was a win only for insurance companies nothing more

[leftstreet]

26. +1

[TreasonousBastard]

30. Look a bit downthread and note that National Health...

is funded by employers, and that's pretty much the only single payer system on the planet. Other European systems are also paid largely by employers.

I don't know offhand who funds Canada's provincial plans or where the central government gets the money for its block grants.

[obamanut2012]

69. 100% agree

[GeorgeGist]

3. Remember ...

[proud2BlibKansan]

4. Drama queens. I got an email from an acquaintance.

He claims his doctor is ending his practice because he can't afford to keep working with Obamacare looming. So I did just a little research and discovered his doctor had announced his retirement a year ago.

Drama queens. That's all there is to this.

[Stuckinthebush]

5. Why in the hell would a doctor say that?

Bullshit

That doctor, then, is an asshole. ACA will increase your f-ing market!

[proud2BlibKansan]

16. I'm not sure the doctor said it.

I think this guy made it up.

[SDjack]

6. The goper reactionaries laying off or closing their businesses will

not hurt the economy. New businesses are forming now to take the customers that are being abandoned by gopers.

[riderinthestorm]

37. Maybe an angle for competitors - Our pizza's .20 higher than Papa Johns so our employees are insured

and NOBODY'S fired!

There's more than a few people out there who would "hear" that message and respond positively with their business.

[hootinholler]

41. You have it backwards

No business is closing or laying people off because of Obamacare. They act on their financials. Employees are a function of the work needed to service their customers. There are some who are adding part time employees and cutting hours of others back so everyone is part time and don't need to be covered.

No one has ever hired because they have extra cash on hand. They hire because they can't meet their production requirements with current staffing levels. It's that simple.

[Bonhomme Richard]

7. That whole repug meme is dumb.

How about we put together a list of all the companies that are hiring next week. Oh wait! There already is....the want ads, temp agencies, headhunters, craigslist, etc.
Like I said it's dumb meme. It's a list of sore losers that were going to lay off anyway or very dumb businessmen that employed people they didn't need, or are going to let production drop because now they won't have enough people. Silly.

[SickOfTheOnePct]

8. I think that most of this is just pissiness over the election

But I can also see where this might be a real burden on some small businesses. If they aren't already offering health insurance, and depending on their profit margins, it may well be necessary for them to lay off employees in order to stay in business, even with the credits.

If a business has 25 employees, and they aren't currently offering health insurance, this is going to be a big expense, even with the credits. If you figure a basic health care plan runs $5000 annually (and I think that is very conservative), that's $81,500 the business would have to come up with this year.

Like I said, I think most of this is pissiness, but I think that there are also real concerns for some small businesses.

[tjwash]

34. if you have 25 full time employees, you should cover them

If you have 25 full time employees and don't have them covered, then that is pretty sad.

[SickOfTheOnePct]

35. Even if it endangers the existence of the business?

I anticipate that employers that can't afford it either not provide coverage at all and pay the fines or offer coverage but not pay any of the premiums and pay the fines.

[riderinthestorm]

38. Wow! The avg premium cost to an employer is probably in the $5 - $10k range.

With just 25 employees that's gonna cost a LOT per year, may even be the entire profit margin for a business of that size. Besides, once you get into that many employees you really need to hire ANOTHER person to manage those benefits.

Telling them to just suck it up and cover the insurance costs may simply be impossible.

[SomethingFishy]

10. It's bullshit... The moron from Papa Johns

claimed that his customers wouldn't stand it if he raised his prices 11 cents on a pizza so he's going to lay off employees or cut their hours instead.

Believe me if people are desperate enough to eat that crap they will pay the 11 cents.

People on the right are throwing temper tantrums. It's hilarious.

[TBF]

13. This is Papa John's house in Louisville -

I think this guy can afford to cover his employees' health insurance:





Their basements are bigger than your entire house. Their property taxes cost more than your annual salary. But if you can afford to buy one of the most valuable residential properties in Jefferson County, there's a good chance you'll have enough cash to pay someone else to mow that 2-acre lot that goes with it.

More here - http://www.courier-journal.com/blogs/money/2008/06/10-most-valuable-homes-in-louisville.html

[SickOfTheOnePct]

14. Especially since all he has to do is raise the price 14 cents per pizza n/t

[TBF]

19. I think he could do with a smigeon less profit as well if he absolutely

had to. It doesn't look like he's starving.

[SickOfTheOnePct]

22. I don't know how many pizzas they sell in a year

But if it's an average of 500,000/day, that's $25.5 million dollars per year. I see nothing wrong with spreading that out among the people buying the pizza rather than the company footing the entire bill.

No one should be surprised that businesses pass on the cost of doing business to their customers.

[TBF]

44. You may not find anything wrong with that -

as a socialist I find it repulsive.

But of course, as you note, certainly not surprising. I'd love to see a universal health care system in this country for this very reason. As long as we are dealing with capitalism businesses are going to fight anything that affects them. Other industrialized countries have figured this out and solved the problem ...

[SickOfTheOnePct]

45. Anyone that can afford to buy a pizza from Papa John's

Can afford to pay an extra 14 cents for it.

Companies that already provide health insurance to their employees (and retirees, where applicable) include it in the cost of their products. The only difference in this case is that since Papa John's doesn't currently provide health care to employees, we're hearing about the actual cost.

Health insurance for employees is just another expense of doing business, no different than the cost of pepperoni, mushrooms and onions. Of course it will be added to the cost of the product, with a commensurate increase in price.

[TBF]

48. I'll bet John in his palace can afford it as well ...

You don't have to explain to me how capitalism works - I understand it just fine. And you can talk until you're blue in the face but I will never agree that it's a good economic system for the majority of people on this planet. We're going to have to agree to disagree on this one, at best.

[SickOfTheOnePct]

49. You're right, we'll just have to disagree

The goal is to ensure that people are able to access health insurance, not to destroy companies as a way to usher in socialism.

[TBF]

52. Maybe he's "destroying" his company by giving pizzas to the NFL -

did you consider that possibility?

http://www.papajohns.com/twomillionpizza/

He's willing to give TWO MILLION pizzas to NFL fans but he can't pay for healthcare? Hahahahahahahahahah .....

Yeah, the problem is the "shoshalism" You rah rah USA ...

[SickOfTheOnePct]

53. Why the snark?

You're the one that said you are a socialist.

Bottom line, this isn't about trying to bankrupt the company, it's about providing healthcare. Providing healthcare benefits is a business expense, and there is nothing unethical about passing that cost on to consumers.

You aren't concerned about a customer paying 14 cents more for a pizza, you're pissed off that the company is allowed to make a profit.

[TBF]

54. Your interpretation of the "hurting capitalist" is the problem -

it is not the owners that are the problem in this equation. It is the income inequality that is the problem, but you're not paid to write about that.

[SickOfTheOnePct]

56. I've got news for you Sparky

I'm not paid to write about anything.

[TBF]

57. I don't know who "Sparky" is but if you are responding

to me I've got to say it's woefully sad that you're not being paid. Are you one of the Waltons? You know, the family that founded Walmart and know controls more wealth than 40% of the country? You are defending them, and you are determined. If you're not one of them than you darn well should be demanding a paycheck. You should get something for kissing their ... well, you know.

Here is some food for thought, just in case you really are a normal person (albeit a confused one). While you are defending pizza moguls (and still haven't explained to me how they can give away millions of pizzas to NFL fans but can't pay health care for their workers), why not take a look at these and you might get a clue as to what the rest of us - the other 99% are talking about.



http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2011/02/income-inequality-in-america-chart-graph

[SickOfTheOnePct]

58. I'm defending the right of companies to make profits

As a self-described socialist, you obviously oppose profit, which is your right.

And the big pizza giveaway that you has you so upset? 2 million pizzas at a cost $5 (max) per pizza is $10 million, written off as advertising expense.

How much do you think it will take to cover employees, completely at company expense, without passing anything on to the consumer (like that insurmountable 14 cents per pizza)?

The average premium for an employer-sponsored plan at a large company is $15,745/year.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/wp/2012/09/11/the-average-employer-health-plan-now-costs-15980-and-thats-kind-of-good-news/

Papa John's has ~2600 locations in the U.S., so assuming 3 full time employees per location (which is probably low, but we'll go with it), that's 7800 employees per year at $15,745, or an annual cost of $122,811,000 annually.

Papa John's net income (profit) in 2010 was $51.9 million.

Tell me again how they're going to pay for the insurance without passing along the cost?

[TBF]

59. It's quite clear what you are doing.

The question is why are you doing it? You refuse to answer that question.

[SickOfTheOnePct]

61. What I'm doing is presenting facts

If you can refute them, then do so.

[argiel1234]

64. curious.

Ive read the exchange.



Why do you think its ok to profit off of people's lives?

Care to answer?

[SickOfTheOnePct]

65. If you've read the entire exchange

Then perhaps you can point out to me where I've said it's OK to profit off of people's lives.

I've never argued that Papa John's shouldn't provide insurance to their employees. But I don't agree that it's wrong for them to include all or part of that cost in the price of the product they sell.

When you buy an American made car, the cost of employee health care is included in the price of that car. When you buy a cart load of items at Costco, the price of employee health care is included in the price of the items you buy. When you buy anything that is produced and sold by companies that provide health care to their employees, the price of that health care is included in the price. In fact, unless you're buying something wholesale, you're the cost of health care for every company in the supply chain is included in the price.

Given that, what's wrong with Papa John's raising the price of a pizza by 14 cents in order to pay for health care for their employees? The numbers show that company profits won't cover the entire cost. So what are the options?

1. No healthcare, and they pay the fines out of profit - bad for the employees
2. Cut employee hours so that they don't fall under the mandate - bad for the employees
3. Offer healthcare, but put the entire cost on the employee and pay the fines out of profits - bad for the employees
4. Raise the price of each pizza by 14 cents and provide fully paid health care to the employees - good for the employees

To me, the best option is #4, so I'm puzzled as to how that equates to being OK with profiting off of people's lives.

[argiel1234]

66. Its simple

Papa John lives solely by profiting off of peoples lives. Customers. franchisees. Distributors.

Its why he has a house worth as much as a small country. He did it by profiting off of people.

Now his greedy ass will be required to help his employees in what he should have been doing all along.

When he passes 14 cents off to customers he is further profiting off of them, leaving his margin intact.

That allows him to continue to rip people off. Its Capitalism and judging by the exchange you love it and have no problem with it.

[SickOfTheOnePct]

67. Current profits won't cover the cost of the insurance

The numbers prove that.

What's the difference between Papa John's including the cost of health care in the price of their pizzas and Ford Motor Company including the cost of health care in the price of their cars? I'm guessing that the CEO of Ford doesn't live in a van down by the river.

You seem to think Papa John's will be forced to provide insurance - they won't. The fines are much less expensive than the insurance, and then the entire cost of coverage will fall on employees.

Are you OK with that?

[argiel1234]

70. If current profits wont cover the cost of insurance

then how is papa Johns able to give away millions of pizzas for free?

You are contradicting yourself


As for the cost on employees I would take an educated guess that more than 95% will fall under or slightly above the poverty level making them eligible for Medicaid

[SickOfTheOnePct]

73. My mistake

When you stated that you had read the entire exchange, I assumed that you actually had.

Post #58 lays out the numbers...

[argiel1234]

75. Unfortunately you are mistaken in your numbers

The cost is actually less than 3$ per pizza. The average annual you cited is for a family, not an individual. And you also conveniently left out that Papa Johns is a franchise based business, meaning John gets a percentage just for using his name on every chain.

Among several other mathematical mistakes


On Edit

when one uses false premises, the conclusion will be false as well

[SickOfTheOnePct]

78. Sorry so slow, had to put dinner in the oven

So the 2 million free pizzas will cost $6 million instead of $10 million. Which would buy even less health care.

Thanks for making my point - much appreciated!

And you're right about single v. family...so let's be generous and say that 2/3 of the employees (5200) get single coverage at average cost of $5615/year. That's $29,198,000.

The remaining 2600 get family coverage at $15745/year. That's $40,937,000.

Total comes to $70,135,000. And this is assuming only 3 employees per location would get health care.

Tell me again how that's going to come out of $51.9 million in profit, a figure by the way, that includes franchise fees?

And what were the mathematical mistakes I made?

So I'll ask again - would you prefer that the company not offer benefits, or raise the price of pizza 14 cents each? And, why do you have no problem with other companies including the cost of health care in their prices, but you think that Papa John's shouldn't?

[argiel1234]

68. your quote

58. "I'm defending the right of companies to make profits"

You are defending profiting off of peoples lives. Its ok. There is no need to be ashamed about it.

That seems to be your position, and you stated you dont want "socialism" either

Just so its crystal clear to everyone

[SickOfTheOnePct]

72. Who at Papa John's died in order to sell a pizza?

And don't worry, I'm not ashamed of believing in capitalism.

I'm still curious as to why you would rather Papa John's employees go without health care than see a 14 cent increase in the price of pizza.

One could easily draw the conclusion that you are less concerned with people receiving health care than you are about putting a company out of business.

[TBF]

76. "I'm not ashamed of believing in capitalism" -

and that in a nutshell is the problem in this country. THIS attitude is why Walmart's owners (the family who inherited the business) have, collectively, control over more wealth than 40% of the country.

This is morally wrong. I don't care if it's "legal", I don't care if it's been here since the initial landgrab that was the "founding" of this country, it's wrong.

And when people get over their greed and bigotry and admit it's wrong, we may finally be able to restructure this country and save the planet (which we are destroying with global warming).

[SickOfTheOnePct]

79. So that I'm perfectly clear and not misrepresenting what you said

You believe that all profit is wrong? Yes or no?

I'm also curious as to why you haven't responded to the facts I laid about Papa John's not making enough profit to cover all of their employees.

Tell me what you would choose, given that there is not enough profit to cover health care...raise the price of pizza 14 cents and provide health care, cut hours so that they don't have to provide heath care, refuse to provide health care and pay the fine, or offer health care but put the entire cost on the employees?

Those really are the only options under current law, so absent changing the ACA, which option would you choose?

[TBF]

80. I believe that socialism would be a better economic system

for our country. Is that clear enough for you?

As to how Papa John's takes care of making profit, I have no problem believing they will cover the cost of that by increasing the cost of their pizzas. I don't know why that should be a surprise, as corporations lower & raise prices on their product at any time. I simply also noted that their founder lives in a castle (multi-million dollar home) and gives away millions of pizzas under other circumstances, yet blames ACA for lay-offs. That is disingenuous. As to your "facts" on how much the health care costs, that has been debunked in this thread despite your best efforts to obscure the issue.

Like I said, you ought to be getting paid for this as you are serving your corporate masters well. Isn't that the American way ...

[SickOfTheOnePct]

81. You might want to look again

before you make statements about what I presented being debunked. Change the costs, change the employee mix, and there still aren't enough profits to cover health insurance without raising the price of pizza. Even with a conservative estimate of only three employees per location.

I don't have corporate masters, but I do have the ability to look at cold, hard numbers and use facts to make the case that your wild assumptions are completely wrong.

And to top it off, I'm able to do it without accusations, name calling or snide remarks.

All in all, I'd say I've got it made.

[TBF]

83. OK, you disagree with CNN - posting here again for others to listen

You've done a brilliant job of defending plutocrats all day though ... just noting that for the record as well.

http://edition.cnn.com/video/#/video/bestoftv/2012/08/09/exp-tsr-foreman-pizza-fact-check.cnn

[SickOfTheOnePct]

84. Thanks for the link

Of course, none of it contradicted anything I said, rather, it reinforced my scenarios.

The CNN scenario of ~$28 million was based on not providing coverage and paying the penalty, which means employees have to cover the cost of health care from the exchanges on their own. No increase in the price of pizza, as the penalty could be paid out of profits.

Papa John's based their estimate of a 14 cent increase on providing health care coverage, which could not be covered by profits.

So, I'll ask you again, not that I expect an answer, but maybe I'll be wrong this time...which is the best option? For Papa John's to pay the penalty from profits and leave the employees on their when it comes to health care? Or to raise the price of pizza 14 cents each, and have the company provide health care? Which do you think the employees would prefer, since really, this is about them?

And thanks again for the reinforcement to my argument - much appreciated!

[Marrah_G]

85. Which 1 percent are you sick of?

[SickOfTheOnePct]

87. Maybe you can explain

How to pay for $70 million in health care costs with $52 million in profit without raising prices?

You pay for employee health care in the price of every product you buy from businesses that offer health care to their employees. Why is pizza different than any other product, i.e, why is it OK for it to be included in other products, but not in Papa John's pizza?

[Marrah_G]

88. I'm still curious which one percent you are sick of?

[SickOfTheOnePct]

90. I'm actually sick of two separate 1% groups

First and foremost, the 1% that hold the majority of the wealth in this country, and use it as a hammer against the rest of the population.

A close second would be the 1% that can't do simple math, i.e., $70 million can't be paid by $52 million. This would be the same 1% that has no problem paying for the health care of Ford employees when they buy a car, but don't understand why they should pay for the health care of the pizza delivery guy when they buy a pizza.

I've asked this question a couple of times, yet no one wants to answer it. I'm guessing that you won't either, but what the heck, I'll try it again.

Of the four options below, which do you believe is the best for the employees of Papa John's?

1. Don't offer health care, pay the ACA fines out of profits, no price increase, and the employees are on their own to get health care through the exchanges.

2. Transition enough employees to part time that ACA won't apply, no price increase, and the employees are on their own to get health care through the exchanges.

3. Offer health care, but put the entire cost on employees, pay the ACA fines out of profits, no price increase, and again, employees pay the full cost.

4. Offer health care, pay the entire bill by raising the price of each pizza by 14 cents, and the employees have health care at no expense.

Which do you believe the employees would choose? Which would you choose?

I find it odd that anyone could claim to be for workers, yet would, out of spite, rather see employees stuck with the bill for their health care rather than do something they already do every single day, i.e., pay for the health care of workers when they buy a product.

[Marrah_G]

91. I believe that it can be a bit of both

He could stand to hoard a little less wealth and pizza can go up a few cents. Personally, I don't give a crap if he raises prices because I would never buy a crappy chain pizza in the first place.

What I find laughable is that here you have a super rich guy crying over having to treat his employees who make very, very little with a little humanity because it might mean he makes a little less after he already has more then anyone could need in a hundred lifetimes and is then defended by someone claiming to be sick of the one percent.

[maui902]

62. A little fact checking from CNN that you may want to share w/ those who threaten to layoff employees

due to the ACA and President Obama's reelection. Spoiler alert, CNN finds that the claim that implementation of the ACA will cost 11 to 14 cents more per pizza is false.

[link:http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/bestoftv/2012/08/09/exp-tsr-foreman-pizza-fact-check.cnn|

[TBF]

77. Ha! Thank you. nt

[dipsydoodle]

11. To provide an analogy

In the UK if the government decided to increase the employers NHS contribution further from 13.8% to a higher figure then I suspect the same could happen here - layoffs. See here for actual current rates and if anyone believes our NHS to be "free" then dream on. http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/nitables/ca38.pdf

[ejpoeta]

28. no one expects it to be free. but you pay half what we do and get better

coverage and better results.

[dipsydoodle]

31. The aggregate

of both employers and employees contibutionc is c.26 %. Are you saying that in the US the equivalent figure is in excess of 52 % of gross annual wages. ?

[PSPS]

15. I don't think they are

I have hundreds of small business clients and I don't hear or see this at all. Of course, I don't know the makeup of these companies your friends and others you know run. But it's entirely possible that they are ill equipped to be running a business in the first place. Or maybe they're fabricating this merely to make a political point and "teach you a lesson."

[mmonk]

18. Because they are repeating the ideology and rhetoric

of the big boys who are the real ones putting them out of business. They delusionally think they are the same.

[DebJ]

20. to deflect anger from themselves to Obama n/t

[Jeff In Milwaukee]

21. No matter how many times you tell them, it doesn't sink in.

Small businesses are not affected by Obamacare, and as you say, there are some pretty generous credits for small employers that volunteer to offer insurance.

But these are the economic equivalent of the Birthers. You can quote the law, chapter and verse, to them and they won't believe it because Rush and Sean and Billo said otherwise.

[JackN415]

23. It's bluffing. Or their business will die and their competitors take over, hire their employees...

[HopeHoops]

24. Sour grapes.

[TreasonousBastard]

25. They're jumping the gun and all upset from...

the crap they're getting from whatever sources are fighting Obamacare.

However, a few things to note:

Somebody has to pay for it, just like somebody would have to pay for single payer and somebody is paying for the plans already out there. Employees generally don't have the money, so employers are going to be hit for it, just like they're hit for workers comp, SS, and all the other programs that can be up to 25% of a workers base pay in some cases.

Let's say the cost averages $5,000 per employee-- even with tax credits (assuming the company pays taxes) it's still a net expense and adds that cost to each employee's pay. Think about giving every employee a $5,000 raise and how that would affect businesses.

An employer who doesn't provide health care now, whether he can afford it or not, isn't likely to appreciate being ordered to provide it at any price.

When I worked for a startup years ago one of the first things we did was look for health insurance and we were shocked at the price (two out of 4 employees smoking didn't help) and just couldn't do it. Obamacare would reduce the price, but it still could be a huge hit to some small operations.

All this doesn't mean I don't think Obamacare is a great step forward and we should start by trashing it for something better. What it means is that I see there will be serious growing pains and we should be looking for solutions to the inevitable problems that will show up as it's implemented.

[SickOfTheOnePct]

27. Excellent post

I think what we'll see is many employers, large and small, dropping coverage altogether and paying the fine instead.

[WhaTHellsgoingonhere]

51. that's exactly what my Republican friend said his...

Company will do. He says "kicking the warehouse workers on to Obamacare" will save the company $10,000. He hates Obama but loves Obamacare.

I'm thinking actions like this are the fast track to single payer.

[riderinthestorm]

36. Agreed. The $2k penalty is FAR cheaper than the actual premium cost for employers

PLUS they would get to eliminate another position (or 2 or 3 - the administrators of the company health insurance policies).

I believe more and more employers will drop coverage. Furthermore, I'm not sure that would be a bad thing (short term pain yes but long term, maybe the best thing) since I think they will quickly come around to the view that single payer is the best way for companies as well.

Corporate pressure on this Admin to create a pathway to single payer will be welcome. The more ways we can exert pressure to create a better health care delivery system in this country the better.

[ksoze]

55. Good. Other sane companies will grab their employees.

[veganlush]

29. they're uninformed grand-standers.

You know what to do.

[KansDem]

32. Because FOX told them they would have to...

[Teamster Jeff]

33. Big sensitive egos have been damaged

"How dare the serfs vote Obama in when I demanded they vote for Romney?"

Lashing out is the way these owners deal with the feeling of being diminished by an Obama win.

[AnnaLee]

39. My, my, maybe we found a way for trickle down to work.

The optimal number of employees is based on need which is a demand issue, not an insurance issue. Price is set by cost so if cost goes up either price or productivity goes up or stockholder dividends and executive compensation go down.

Ultimately the buyers of the pizza pay the cost (or at least a part of it) but why shouldn't they? That is true of all employer paid health care, isn't it???). So I get a plan from the workplace but the guy who makes my pizza doesn't. Doesn't make sense to me. It's the price of doing business in the US. Unless, of course,... we are ready to talk single payer.

[DCBob]

40. I suspect this is mostly BS.

There might be some but very very few. It appears to be mostly a political stunt protesting the election.

[hughee99]

42. They should have announce the layoffs before the election

and we could have blamed them for intentionally trying to hurt the economy.

I suspect these layoffs were coming anyway, and using the ACA to justify them is better than admitting how bad the company is really doing.

[dickthegrouch]

43. Lose the lawsuits and the advertising - healthcare overheads will vanish

No-one has ever adequately explained to me WHY healthcare is so much more expensive in the US than any other country in the world. I broke my ankle in Paris, France total cost to me $46. If I'd done the same in the US I'd have been bankrupted by the many thousand dollar bill from any hospital I'd have been unlucky enough to end up in.

WHY does a pill that I can buy for $0.10 in Mexico or Canada cost $3.00 just because I cross a border?

WHY does US healthcare charge so much?

I know people use the word "Costs" to 'explain' it - they don't know the meaning of the word. Show me you know the difference between costs, overheads, price and profit and then we can start a discussion.

[JoeyT]

46. Because most of them are lying about laying people off.

They're all lying about laying people off because of Obamacare, and most of them are lying about laying anyone off at all.

It's just more conservative wank fantasies. "The guy I wanted didn't get elected, so I'm going to fucking fire everybody!"

[democrattotheend]

47. In the long term, employers will probably benefit

Because providing coverage for things like routine screenings will mean less lost productivity due to employee medical conditions. If an employee can go to a doctor routinely and get on a prescription to manage a health problem early on, they are much less likely to need to take weeks off down the line for surgery. Maybe the increased productivity doesn't cover the whole premium cost but it's definitely something to think about.

Furthermore, I think the businesses that are talking about laying people off because of Obamacare are the ones whose owners are being ideological. The truth is, the law (unfortunately) allows employers to avoid the health care obligation by paying a miniscule fine. My boyfriend used to work for a home health care agency and he thinks that is what they are likely to do rather than provide insurance for the aides.

[aandegoons]

50. Passive Agressive.

Or more likely Covert Aggression.

Either way they really need some help.

[gollygee]

60. Sour grapes

"I will make working people pay in one way or another for voting for Obama."

If they had the number of employees they needed, they will have to hire back that number of employees. It's a publicity stunt. IF they didn't need that number of employees, they wouldn't have had them in the first place.

But I agree with the first reply that the ultimate problem is and always has been tying health care to employment. It's hard on people but it's hard on business (particularly small business) as well.

[One_Life_To_Give]

63. $5/hr

For a full time employee the cost of providing health coverage would range between $2.50/hr and $7/hr depending upon details in the plan, family vs individual, deductibles etc. Federal minimum wage is currently $7.25/hr. With 25 employees it's going to add another $5000 to the weekly payroll nut.

While I think much of that cost could be passed along without difficulty. If you are the one concerned with making payroll every week it's going to be unsettling to see this number put in front of you. Having to generate an additional $5000 per week that wasn't required last year.

[SickOfTheOnePct]

86. I agree about passing on the cost

Businesses do that now, and no one seems to mind. But for some reason, the thought that anyone that isn't currently providing health care raising prices to cover it now is a horrible thing that shouldn't be permitted.

I don't get it - I paid for employee health care when I bought my Explorer, but I shouldn't have to pay for it when I buy a pizza?

[Zoeisright]

71. Because they're a bunch of fucking cry-baby

LOONS.

[Politicub]

74. They are lying to you

Unless they seriously want to stop growing their business to make a point.

Oh well - there will be others out there to help meet demand.

[moondust]

82. Political coercion.

If it's not illegal it should be.

[PennsylvaniaMatt]

89. President Obama has HELPED our small business

Because of the Geothermal heating and cooling tax credit in the 2009 stimulus, my step-dad's Plumbing and Heating company is booming! We have never been busier - and more successful. So Joe Biden is right when he says We ARE better off now than we were 4 years ago!