Papa John Is Mad About Obama Care

Any idea of how many persons are employed to provide the upkeep and maintenance of his mansion estate?

Government provides an out from paying tax, simply don't work, no income means no taxes, and you become entitled to a share of what others produce who continue to pay taxes. By golly, that sounds a little like "From each according to their abilities, to each according to their needs."

 

Have you got a comparison? It certainly doesn't feel like I'm not taxed that much. It's not a trick question, by the way.

 

(I'll reply to the rest later cause I'm in a big rush- I need to drive my sister to ATL.)

I said that those who work or go to college are not allowed to receive food stamps. I was going to school full time, but not working, and I was denied foodstamps. Meanwhile, my brother wasn't working or going to school and he was getting $300+ a month for (literally) doing nothing.

 

Your other post makes more sense now. It was 5am here. That's my excuse.

 

I can't believe Papa John is still pissed off. Jeez, whata grouch!

"Damn you kids!!! Get off my lawn!!!"

 

What am I supposed to be comparing? Are you saying the UK taxes are much lower than the US taxes?

 

I've yet to see where Papa John has claimed to be pissed off or even angry. Best I can tell, he simply stated that he was going to raise the price of his pizzas to offset some added costs government has imposed on doing business. Probably many businesses will do the same as they find their costs rising.

 

He was just saying that he didnt think his taxes were high. And they are just average. You could have named a few other countries that have over a 50% tax rate like germany and france

 

The individual UK and US tax 'burden'. I have tried to find out but it's Greek to me. If you know the US individual pays more than the UK individual - how so?

 

No.
- in other-words Taxed quite high.

 

That's not at all what I said. What I was saying is "If you feel you are taxed to little, you can move to the UK" where I believe someone has claimed taxes are higher and preferred to be higher for the fine services the government provides.

 

You are right and I am wrong. I miss read your post. Sorry. It does feel like we are taxed more than the US, but I don't know. I think it depends on how much you earn. I think the divergence is at about £40.000 - $64.000 - average earnings £24.000 - $43.000.

 

Although, I will say, I see the Liberal perspective. Because rich people waste our tax money constantly, so why not share with the poor also? I agree with that. But I also believe the US government is about 80% waste.

However, there's so many better ways they could do it. People have become reliant on government, even though one can always get food and housing from charities and churches.

 

I'd like to see them cope if the Gov' didn't...

Do you mean: 'The US government should not be spending 80% of it's current budget on what it does. It should be back in our pockets' ?

 

Yeah. I think the free market would level it out. If we kept more of our money, people would be buying more products. Therefore, businesses will need more workers. The TARP funds alone, would've been $12,000 per person if distributed back to us. AND it probably would've worked better to stimulate the economy, because free individuals spend their money differently.

 

So I did the math, and if you took John Schnatter's entire annual income, including his investment income (which is separate from his salary), and divided it amongst all of papa john's employees, they would each make a total of $171 more that year than they currently do.

Of course, this could only go on a single year, and than all of papa johns employees would be out of a job. john schnatter would make $0 that year, and so would lose all incentives to manage his company, risk his capital, and so provide those people with employment.

 

What would the numbers look like if you used his net worth?

 

I am guessing that net worth includes stocks. So if so should all stock holders give thier shares to the employees or only john.

 

That would provide every man, woman, and child about $0.75 each, while Bill Gates could provide about $190.00. Maybe we should be targeting Bill Gates instead?

But each of these so called wealthy persons are NOT sitting on a supply of unspent currency, and converting from wealth into currency would result in a much less amount of currency than their purported worth.

It's pointless to argue over the net worth of another as though they're not sharing their money equitably. By spending their money they create jobs, and many of those jobs would quickly disappear if the wealthiest did not exist as there would be no one capable of affording many of the things that only the rich can afford to buy, which seldom are the necessities of life, and the overall effect is that they are making more of the necessities of life both more available and more affordable to more of the people.

 

Give me a fucking break target Gates instead.


There are countless articles about all the charity work he does as well as his misses.

They have a foundation in which they focus on ...... wait guess what....

Global Health Program

in which they focus on.....

Ya geez Bill Gates he is a greedy motherfucker isn't he....... He just doesn't want healthcare for America he would like to see it Global.

Now that's a crazy Idea eah..... Global healthcare /sarcasm


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_&_Melinda_Gates_Foundation