Obamacare: Now Appearing On Your Restaurant Bill

[Tsing Tao]

Lmao.

Florida Restaurant Charging Customers For Obamacare Costs That Don't Exist Yet
by Kevin Short
Posted: 02/27/2014 3:26 pm EST

"A Florida sports bar is now serving its burgers and wings with a side of political controversy, and diners aren't feeling it.

"Eight locations of Gator's Dockside, a popular central Florida sports bar chain, have started tacking on 1 percent "ACA Surcharge" to customers' bills, CNN Money reported Thursday. The Gator Group, which runs the eight locations, claims that the surcharge is necessary to offset the cost of the Affordable Care Act, better known as Obamacare. The company maintains it's just being transparent with customers:

"Though the restaurant blames the new surcharge on Obamacare, the employer mandate, which will require Gator's Dockside to provide coverage to 70 percent of its full-time employees, actually won't go into effect until 2015. Currently, only the restaurant's managers receive healthcare, according to CNN Money."

More>>

Congratulations on posting essentially the exact same article (sans the silly facebook stuff) that was in my OP. Reading comprehension for the win!

 

[fhl]

Lmao.

Florida Restaurant Charging Customers For Obamacare Costs That Don't Exist Yet
by Kevin Short
Posted: 02/27/2014 3:26 pm EST

"A Florida sports bar is now serving its burgers and wings with a side of political controversy, and diners aren't feeling it.

"Eight locations of Gator's Dockside, a popular central Florida sports bar chain, have started tacking on 1 percent "ACA Surcharge" to customers' bills, CNN Money reported Thursday. The Gator Group, which runs the eight locations, claims that the surcharge is necessary to offset the cost of the Affordable Care Act, better known as Obamacare. The company maintains it's just being transparent with customers:

"Though the restaurant blames the new surcharge on Obamacare, the employer mandate, which will require Gator's Dockside to provide coverage to 70 percent of its full-time employees, actually won't go into effect until 2015. Currently, only the restaurant's managers receive healthcare, according to CNN Money."

More>>

Every businessman knows you charge what you'll have to pay in the future. That's why gas goes up at the gas station when futures go up, but before gas stations have purchased the gas. I guess we would have to conclude that all gas station owners acquired their gas stations at least in part from leftards who didn't know about replacement cost and went bankrupt. Then the leftards went into journalism where you can write nonsense and get a raise if it helps the nefarious cause.

 

[Tsing Tao]

Every businessman knows you charge what you'll have to pay in the future. That's why gas goes up at the gas station when futures go up, but before gas stations have purchased the gas. I guess we would have to conclude that all gas station owners acquired their gas stations at least in part from leftards who didn't know about replacement cost and went bankrupt. Then the leftards went into journalism where you can write nonsense and get a raise if it helps the nefarious cause.

Not just that, but if Ricter had read the original article he'd have noted (inconveniently, perhaps) that the compliance costs have already begun, even if the health insurance costs haven't. The company has had to hire folks to tell them how to get in compliance with the law.

 

[Lucrum]

Lmao.

Florida Restaurant Charging Customers For Obamacare Costs That Don't Exist Yet
by Kevin Short
Posted: 02/27/2014 3:26 pm EST

"A Florida sports bar is now serving its burgers and wings with a side of political controversy, and diners aren't feeling it.

"Eight locations of Gator's Dockside, a popular central Florida sports bar chain, have started tacking on 1 percent "ACA Surcharge" to customers' bills, CNN Money reported Thursday. The Gator Group, which runs the eight locations, claims that the surcharge is necessary to offset the cost of the Affordable Care Act, better known as Obamacare. The company maintains it's just being transparent with customers:

"Though the restaurant blames the new surcharge on Obamacare, the employer mandate, which will require Gator's Dockside to provide coverage to 70 percent of its full-time employees, actually won't go into effect until 2015. Currently, only the restaurant's managers receive healthcare, according to CNN Money."

More>>

FAIL!

 

[piezoe]

So, as usual, the "facts" presented in this article sounded odd so I did a little digging to understand why. I mean, why would so many states give up free federal money and burden their taxpayers in such a way? There had to be a reason beyond simply not liking the ACA. And, of course, there is.

Turns out that these expansion funds are paid 100% for the first three years. After that, the states themselves have to find 10% of the expansion fees from their own budgets. Many states took a look at their budgets long term and realized they simply could not pay for these expansion funds, even at the 10% level, without taking on a larger debt burden. So they opted out.

It is true that all citizens of every state have to pay a tax that covers the expansion regardless of whether states they live in expand or not, but this is not the state's fault, it is the federal government's fault. Additionally, there is evidence that this offer to pay 100% of the funds from the Federal Government for the first three years might be bait and switch, and that the Federal Government might not make the full payments - or scale them back considerably in the future.



Taking the money and expanding medicaid would result in many states having a worse fiscal situation in three years, so they opted out. Fiscal responsibility is alien to liberals, so I can understand why the move would be confusing.

Tao, it is true that all these Governor's said they were against expansion because after the 100% subsidy period their States could not afford the 10% match. All of the later-released studies, however, and without exception so far as I'm aware, have concluded that the tax revenues generated from 90% funding will equal or exceed the 10% required State outlay. In fact, most of them concluded there will be a net gain to the states in revenue after they chip in their 10%..

All the Republican governors are now aware of these economic studies. One can only conclude that their continued opposition to expansion is now being driven by their reluctance to admit their future net cost projections were wrong, or some combination of political posturing (i.e., what they think is politically expedient in their State), ideology, or, dare I say, stupidity.

I'm guessing this will be the major issue in upcoming State political campaigns. The Republican are vulnerable on this, and therefore I think we will see a change. They will find some way to justify backtracking on this issue. (The detailed economic studies came out after the Republican Governors had already committed to blocking expansion. They did that very early on -- a political mistake it now seems.)

 

[LEAPup]

I wish there were a Gator's Dockside in my area. I'd go eat there today, leave a hell of a tip, and a short note of thanks to the owner(s) for doing what they're doing to SHOW obamacare is anything but "free."

Yes, spike, rectum, piehead, I'd gladly pay the surcharge and drive home happy knowing this business did the right thing. And yes, I'm now a victim of the nazi after losing the health insurance I had, and liked well.

 

[Tsing Tao]

Tao, it is true that all these Governor's said they were against expansion because after the 100% subsidy period their States could not afford the 10% match. All of the later-released studies, however, and without exception so far as I'm aware, have concluded that the tax revenues generated from 90% funding will equal or exceed the 10% required State outlay. In fact, most of them concluded there will be a net gain to the states in revenue after they chip in their 10%..

All the Republican governors are now aware of these economic studies. One can only conclude that their continued opposition to expansion is now being driven by their reluctance to admit their future net cost projections were wrong, or some combination of political posturing (i.e., what they think is politically expedient in their State), ideology, or, dare I say, stupidity.

I'm guessing this will be the major issue in upcoming State political campaigns. The Republican are vulnerable on this, and therefore I think we will see a change. They will find some way to justify backtracking on this issue. (The detailed economic studies came out after the Republican Governors had already committed to blocking expansion. They did that very early on -- a political mistake it now seems.)

You're assuming a lot here, armchair quarterback. I have to concede that what you say is a possibility, but it is also quite possible that the governors know their state's finances better than supposed horseshit "studies" in favor of Obamacare, and the stellar record in which they have performed thus far.

 

[Lucrum]

You're assuming a lot here, armchair quarterback. I have to concede that what you say is a possibility, but it is also quite possible that the governors know their state's finances better than supposed horseshit "studies" in favor of Obamacare, and the stellar record in which they have performed thus far.

+ 2.5

 

[piezoe]

You're assuming a lot here, armchair quarterback. I have to concede that what you say is a possibility, but it is also quite possible that the governors know their state's finances better than supposed horseshit "studies" in favor of Obamacare, and the stellar record in which they have performed thus far.

Well yes, obviously I am. Let's wait and see what happens. I'm willing to go way out on a limb and predict that 100% of those governors who run for re-election at some point will backtrack BEFORE their re-election campaign gets under way and that at least half of them will backtrack before the mid-term election.

 

[Tsing Tao]

Well yes, obviously I am. Let's wait and see what happens. I'm willing to go way out on a limb and predict that 100% of those governors who run for re-election at some point will backtrack BEFORE their re-election campaign gets under way and that at least half of them will backtrack before the mid-term election.

Prediction noted. And, I'm assuming if the GOP wins the senate and keeps the house, thereby doing all sorts of "evil" things to the ACA, that you'll change your prediction on the other half?