Trickle down health care costs

[TXgolfer]

This has nothing to do with obamacare.......yet. But I said way back when that the mandate on businesses was silly because the cost will just get passed on to the consumer.

Well I ate in San Francisco alot this past weekend. I normally don't pay too much attention to the bill but today I knew my food purchase was a whole dollar amount before tax. $20 to be exact. The bill came and the total was $22.77....wait a second....that is almost 14% tax! Upon further inspection the sales tax was 9.85%.....The city health care fund surcharge was 4%. I just googled it and apparently it has been going on for a couple years and I just noticed it.

In San Francisco, Health Care Shows Up on Restaurant Bills - Health Blog - WSJ

 

[Miss-Delectable]

Interesting.

Will pay attention to the bill when I am over there.

 

[TheOracle]

Um...how is this different than shopping in a district that has a voter approved sales tax for schools?

What's 'trickle down' about this?

 

[Jiro]

Um...how is this different than shopping in a district that has a voter approved sales tax for schools?

What's 'trickle down' about this?

very different. You just answered your own question.

 

[TheOracle]

very different. You just answered your own question.

I'm asking how this is trickle-down.

Trickle-down economics has nothing to do with local taxes that help support certain programs.

 

[Jiro]

I'm asking how this is trickle-down.

Trickle-down economics has nothing to do with local taxes that help support certain programs.

1. S.F. has a health-care mandate that requires businesses to offer health insurance to employees or pay a fee to the city to fund health care.
2. In order to pay for it, restaurants are making us (customers) to pay for it
3. What restaurants doing (in other word... trickling down to customers) is illegal - IMO. U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit will rule on it later this month and I believe they will rule that restaurants cannot charge a fee to customers to pay for health care.

 

[TheOracle]

1. S.F. has a health-care mandate that requires businesses to offer health insurance to employees or pay a fee to the city to fund health care.
2. In order to pay for it, restaurants are making us (customers) to pay for it
3. What restaurants doing (in other word... trickling down to customers) is illegal - IMO. U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit will rule on it later this month and I believe they will rule that restaurants cannot charge a fee to customers to pay for health care.

Passing on costs is not the same as trickle-down economics!

 

[TXgolfer]

Passing on costs is not the same as trickle-down economics!

Can you please show where the phrase "trickle-down economics" was used?

 

[TXgolfer]

Um...how is this different than shopping in a district that has a voter approved sales tax for schools?

What's 'trickle down' about this?

A) It's a business imposed surcharge.....not a tax
B) Not voter approved
C) 4% as opposed to 1/2% (a normal tax hike)

 

[saywhatkid]

1. S.F. has a health-care mandate that requires businesses to offer health insurance to employees or pay a fee to the city to fund health care.
2. In order to pay for it, restaurants are making us (customers) to pay for it
3. What restaurants doing (in other word... trickling down to customers) is illegal - IMO. U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit will rule on it later this month and I believe they will rule that restaurants cannot charge a fee to customers to pay for health care.

Well, seems that the 4% surcharge/fee is a better deal for the businesses. Any costs, regardless of the source, are passed down to the user/consumer/customer. Profits are always required to grow a business.

Now, about those business owners that take a salary equal to 1000 of their workers because they feel entitled to it, regardless of the company's financial health....:rl:

 

[Beowulf]

"This has nothing to do with obamacare...yet."

Hoo boy, here we go...

 

[TXgolfer]

"This has nothing to do with obamacare...yet."

Hoo boy, here we go...

Yeah well. It's theory in action. Obviously businesses will have to account for the costs of the obamacare mandate as well when they are fully realized.

 

[StSapphire]

Hm, that is trickling on down. I can smell the faint aroma of ammonia, and it's a lovely golden color. Thank you, oh most gracious capitalism, for bestowing upon us the generosity of what you deem appropriate to "trickle down" to us lowly and unworthy plebeians.

 

[Beowulf]

Yeah well. It's theory in action. Obviously businesses will have to account for the costs of the obamacare mandate as well when they are fully realized.

Oh boo hoo. Only those businesses with over 60 employees will have to face it. They will find a way to afford it and everyone will be so danged thrilled and healthier. :P

 

[jillio]

Well, seems that the 4% surcharge/fee is a better deal for the businesses. Any costs, regardless of the source, are passed down to the user/consumer/customer. Profits are always required to grow a business.
Now, about those business owners that take a salary equal to 1000 of their workers because they feel entitled to it, regardless of the company's financial health....:rl:

Exactly.

 

[saywhatkid]

What's 'trickle down' about this?

I'm asking how this is trickle-down.

Trickle-down economics has nothing to do with local taxes that help support certain programs.

Can you please show where the phrase "trickle-down economics" was used?

Yeah well. It's theory in action. Obviously businesses will have to account for the costs of the obamacare mandate as well when they are fully realized.

I believe this is somewhat related to trickle-down economics, but a reversal of it. "Theory in action" is a very apt description.

 

[Beowulf]

I believe this is somewhat related to trickle-down economics, but a reversal of it. "Theory in action" is a very apt description.

Huh? I don't see theory in action. I see the effects of local tax increases.

 

[jillio]

Oh boo hoo. Only those businesses with over 60 employees will have to face it. They will find a way to afford it and everyone will be so danged thrilled and healthier. :P

Those loosely formed connections always seem to pop up in threads on these topics. No relation or correlation at all, but people will go out of their way to try to make associations. We just see soooo much more of it when people think they can effectively come up with a negative portrayal of anything Obama. Twisting evidence to suit the judgement.

 

[saywhatkid]

Huh? I don't see theory in action. I see the effects of local tax increases.

Well, trickle down is a term meaning stuff trickles down on the bottom.

It means that tax breaks for the wealthy should generate money that trickles down to the lower part of the economic food chain. The problem now is that the people being fed this trickle down money often live in Asia or Mexico, while the CEO of a large company enjoys the finer things in life, his company changes address to Bermuda to avoid taxes and enable the CEO to keep his inflated salary, and the rest of the country struggles to find a decent job.

In effect, this fee is a trickle down thing as well. The owner ain't paying this; we are. The insurance fees are trickling down.

 

[Beowulf]

Well, trickle down is a term meaning stuff trickles down on the bottom.

It means that tax breaks for the wealthy should generate money that trickles down to the lower part of the economic food chain. The problem now is that the people being fed this trickle down money often live in Asia or Mexico, while the CEO of a large company enjoys the finer things in life, his company changes address to Bermuda to avoid taxes and enable the CEO to keep his inflated salary, and the rest of the country struggles to find a decent job.

In effect, this fee is a trickle down thing as well. The owner ain't paying this; we are. The insurance fees are trickling down.

I know what trickle down economics is. It is simply voodoo economics and has been proven time and again not to work.