Papa John Is Mad About Obama Care

The clip doesn't even get to the point, it just mentions his name and stops. It may have been cut short for some reason.

 

holy shit. it sucks to be all of us.

 

Maybe glitch there, it works here. Not missing all that much, don't sweat it. He just points out that a**h*** John is crying about costing $.13 a pizza, while he's giving away 2 million.

 

you learn something new every day.

 

Well if he didn't like Obamacare, he's REALLY probably not going to care much for this

Reminds me somewhat of J.F.K.'s plan from what I read prior to his untimely death.

Of course Kennedy didn't have Drones covering Him. :cheers2:

http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press...gov&utm_medium=shorturl&utm_campaign=shorturl

 

I wouldn't exactly call him a rube... he can "afford" to "give away" 2 million pizzas because it's clearly not a zero sum game. It's a marketing technique, and he's doing it in the hopes of bringing in more revenue by attracting people to his 'papa rewards program'. Providing healthcare for his employees on the other hand, will bring in no additional revenue, has nothing to do with marketing, and so is a very different thing. Saying that because he can afford one, he should be able to afford the other, is moronic. One is an investment in the hopes of expanding his customer base, the other simply imposes additional costs on the price of doing business.

Even if he was giving away 2 million pizzas without any hopes of recouping the losses, that would completely contradict your claim that he's as "greedy as they get"... so your entire argument is bunk.

 

No... agreeing with his tactics is moronic.

 

well, i don't think acknowledging the existence of marketing necessarily equals agreeing with anyone's specific marketing tactics..

 

one time at band camp we ordered pizza and then we took th

 

Would you be willing to work for a loss? Just what is your definition of fairness?

 

And think after having four children I must have bought at lease half of one of those cars. K so 11 cents a pie but then not only do we have the Obama care thing the gas prices are still high. I look at both points and the biggest point is these drivers need to make more money. They should be getting 11 cents.
I'm just saying.
Edie

 

im confused, what cars are you talking about.

 

I didn't even know you could buy cars by having children, and based on that post a car and be purchased by having 8 children? What government program is responsible for this?

 

its the 2 post troll. we have seen them before and we will see them again. i have a feeling some of them are well known names under different names.

 

John Schnatter is hardly working for a loss. Schnatter was listed at number 17on Forbes list. Here's where he lives:


In case you didn't know it, healthcare in the US has traditionally been an employer benefit (employers get tax breaks for providing it). Since employers like Schnatter are breaking that tradition, it makes the case for government funded universal care.

What's fair about being forced to go without healthcare since it is a human need, (it's not a want)?

As pensfan13 pointed out, why should he be forced to pay for all those Papa John employees (not moochers) without healthcare? What's fair about that?

 

Healthcare became an employer benefit during WWII, when prices and wages were more or less frozen by government as a means of attracting and providing benefits in another form to employees.

No one is forced to go without healthcare, most people, including those who can well afford it, simply prefer to spend their money on other things. And if government will pick up the responsibility, why wouldn't they? And I do agree, healthcare is a human need, but that does not make it a right.

Papa John, as well as all businesses who employ people, pay people for the work they perform. Those who employ persons, full time, part time, one time, etc. are not taking on responsibility for that employees life, but are only responsible for paying them a wage that they both accept as agreeable for the time they are employed. If the remuneration is deemed as unfair, by either the employee or the employer, each should have an equal right to refuse or negotiate acceptable terms.

 

False: have you not read the OP?

If working people who can afford it go without it, simply spending their money on other things is shortsighted, irresponsible and stupid.

Isn't that the very behavior (irresponsible mooching) you're protesting?

Then why do you say "most people, including those who can well afford it, simply prefer to spend their money on other things?" Are you condoning irresponsible behavior?

Yeah but you have not addressed the break in the tradition of US employer provided healthcare benefits. Employer provided healthcare benefits are central to the US healthcare system. Again, since employers like Schnatter are breaking that tradition, it makes a strong case for government funded universal care now.

 

Yes, that's exactly it. It's a loss-leader and hopes to benefit from it. But, there is no way to quantify the return, it's a bet. But these kind of gimmicks work, or businesses wouldn't do it.

Here's where your zero sum comment comes in.. "simply imposes additional costs? So, employees with access to basic health care, maybe they and their families are a bit healthier, happier, less stress in the employee's lives and therefore maybe better, more motivated employees with higher morale... that doesn't play into it?

Illustrates a common tactic. He's willing to go for the hope of expanding customer base, but not willing to go for the hope of improving the lives of his employees, all for the measly cost of 13 cents a pie?
If his pizza was worth it, why not raise the cost 50 cents and advertize that he's doing so to help provide a better quality of life for his people? No, he'd rather go for the free pizza gimmick.

It illustrates his values. More customers, fuck the employees, they're just tools to be used for propaganda.

From my view, not bunk. The choice he makes between free pizza and caring about his employees proves he's a greedy, manipulative fuck.

Individual is absolutely right about the rise of employer sponsored health care..

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health...tates#The_rise_of_employer-sponsored_coverage

 

False? What are you reading out of the OP?

 

Yes it is.

Yes again.

Do you see me condoning it? I was simply stating a fact.

That's nonsensical, employers can provide various benefits in addition to the wages they pay their employees, and not all employers provide healthcare benefits to their employees, so it may be traditional for some but not for others. Who's tradition is Schnatter breaking, and how is a case, even a weak case, being made for government (taxpayer) funded universal care now?