http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/21/business/smallbusiness/a-bakery-with-95-employees-confronts-the-new-health-care-law.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

The NY Times headline is "Questions Abound in Learning to Adjust to Health Care Overhaul".

The only real question is "name your poison": how will a small bakery business with 95 employees take the huge hit with a federal ObamaCare and government bureaucracy gone beserk?

Pay for health insurance for all employees , costing $108,000 in a business making a profit of $200,000? And taking on that much more paperwork ?

Not offer health insurance and let employees find coverage from the government , costing the business  $130,000?

Get the employee count under 50 , by outsourcing and hiring part-timers?

(This part time option will be taken by many businesses, which will result in liberal clucking about greedy businesses, and also result in millions signing on for government health care..)

Which option is the best, awaits the intricate regulations and details of the atrocity known as Obamacare , still being worked on by cold leftist anti-free market bureaucrats.... 

"Rachel Shein and Steve Pilarski, the married owners of the bakery....are weighing their options as the date approaches. “Our revenues are about $8 million, but the food business is a low-margin industry so cutting $108,000 out of our profits, which are just over $200,000, is a big deal,” said Ms. Shein, who is the chief executive. They are evaluating different ways to comply with the new law and finance the expense. "

 “It’s ironic that our success meant we could grow,” Ms. Shein said, “and now we will be competing against smaller companies, with 50 employees or fewer, who will be able to charge less per item because they don’t have the financial burden of health insurance.” Prices are currently similar among local competitors, Ms. Shein said, and she says she believes the increase in her prices could affect her sales, possibly significantly.

ObamaCare is a looming disaster.

 

Less than 0.2% of small businesses will be required to provide insurance for their employees or face the penalties.  Congrats on finding one of them.

 

And thousands or larger companies were given exemptions by Obama.

lol

In response to tvoter's comment:

About 1 thousand

1,231 to be exact

In response to UserName99's comment:

 

Less than 0.2% of small businesses will be required to provide insurance for their employees or face the penalties.  Congrats on finding one of them.

 

 

My goodness,  didnt they have a big signing ceremony at the White House and everything back in 2010....so much ado about nothing?

 

Government programs always perform as expected, lean,  mean, efficient and helpful...what's to worry about?

What is the rationale behind a business...any business...much less a 'small' bakery with 95 workers...

...of NOT trying to provide health insurance for its employees...?

 

In my youth, I once worked for a woodworking shop (in Mass.) that had exactly 8 employees, including the proprietor and his wife.  They had full benefits, including health insurance, 401k and profit sharing.  The owner knew that a) it was the right thing to do, and b) a covered employee is usually a happier, more productive employee.

Today, he's still in business and still very successful, and his shop is up to 19 full-timers.

Anecdotal, but instructive.

 

In response to ComingLiberalCrackup's comment:

The coverage - where available - will still come from private insurers.

Surely, you don't have any complaints about the private insurance industry, do you...??

 

 

In response to MattyScornD's comment:

Anecdotally,

More than 200,000 small businesses vanished between early 2008 and 2010 -- a period covering the Great Recession and its immediate aftermath -- taking with them in excess of 3 million jobs.....not surprisingly, business owners are among those with the most negative views of the Obama administration. Polls show just 35 percent of them approve of Obama's job performance, while 59 percent disapprove          

In response to ComingLiberalCrackup's comment:

And just what do you think it proves to point out that people who lost their jobs as a result of the financial and the mortgage crises but chose to blame Obama instead?

In response to ComingLiberalCrackup's comment:

That's not an anecdote.  It's a non sequitur.

It's also irrelevant to the topic.

Weak dodge.  Again.

You're bad at this....

 

 

 

 

In response to WhatDoYouWantNow's comment:

The financial and mortgage crises were caused by Government policies.

Hardworking self-reliant risk-taking Americans who run small businesses are the job creators, the engine of the private sector economy.

They blame Obama and his Party of Government,  because it is their policies which kept the private sector economy in the tank. "They didnt build that",  Obama policies ruined that, and impinge on economic freedom with their statist takeover of the health care system.

ObamaCare will only make the situation worse.

In response to ComingLiberalCrackup's comment:

That's barely half true.  The usurious private lenders, hedge funders and credit-default swappers were just as culpable and paid their comparatively paltry fines, because they knew it.

As for the besainted "small business owners", they can blame whomever they like to help them sleep at night, but the simple fact is that a minority of small businesses succeed.  In fact, most of them fail due to poor management or faulty business plans.

As I offered - and you summarily ignored - it's entirely possible for well-run, ethically administered businesses to survive even the worst economic downturns and still keep their souls in the process.

 

 

This post has been removed.

In response to ComingLiberalCrackup's comment:

Well would you look at that. You can drop everything but the stock political memes from Fox and the GOP out of a CLC post..... 

....and it stillsays the same thing.

Oh what the fresh hell, BDC?

 

Why would you pull CLC's post?!

Especially after I replie to it with that?

><

Go and boil your head.

This post has been removed.

Is the OP suggesting that we do away with employer sponsored health insurance coverage because a few businesses can't afford it?

Otherwise, I know as a consumer, I would be willing to pay a little extra for my bakery if it meant the employees of said bakery got decent wages and health insurance coverage.

As long as we have this ludicrous health insurance system..then employee health care is simply a cost of doing business. Nothing wrong with some minimum standards.

In response to miscricket's comment:

"Is the OP suggesting that we do away with employer sponsored health insurance coverage because a few businesses can't afford it?"

Nice twist of a question...the truth is more than "a few" businesses are put at risk by the excessive costs,  paperwork and complexity of ObamaCare..all businesses will be affected. ObamaCare itself will badly hurt the economy in 2014...

"Otherwise, I know as a consumer, I would be willing to pay a little extra for my bakery if it meant the employees of said bakery got decent wages and health insurance coverage."

As mentioned in the article, other bakeries with less than 50 employee would have a big advantage and lower prices...so feel free to shop at the "ObamaCare Cooks the Books  Bakery"..."Higher Prices Guaranteed "

"As long as we have this ludicrous health insurance system..then employee health care is simply a cost of doing business. Nothing wrong with some minimum standards."

This ludicrous health insurance system of employer provided coverage  is a result of, guess what, government policies! As usual, your friendly Nanny State causes chaos, and will double down with more ideas which will make things even worse.

In response to ComingLiberalCrackup's comment:

This doesn't pass the smell test.  I find it hard to believe that a business with 95 employees, generating $8M in revenue makes only $200K in profit.  Why bother?

If they are on the up-and-up, $180K is about 2% of their revenues, so they can just raise prices 2% to make up the difference.  If you paid $5 for a loaf of their bread, you'll pay $5.10. That's not the huge disadvantage you're painting.

 

This post has been removed.

In response to UserName99's comment:

and only .001 % of all CEO make more than 10 millions dollar but that never stop the moonbats from attacking the rich sucessful people

In response to UserName99's comment:

And, what's really amazing, is that you beleive that.

In response to MattyScornD's comment:

Sounds like a good person, and a good businessman.

Big difference between doing something becasue you see how it will help your business, and doing something because government forces you to do so, in some cases, at the cost of closing your business.

As your case shows, Obamacare is not about health insurance, it is about government control  where it doesn't belong.

In response to skeeter20's comment:

 

In response to UserName99's comment:

 

Less than 0.2% of small businesses will be required to provide insurance for their employees or face the penalties.  Congrats on finding one of them.

 

 

And, what's really amazing, is that you beleive that.

 

 

Its a fact, so of course I believe it.

 

Because this breadmaker doesn’t give his employees health care, they show up as charity cases at the hospital emergency room when something inevitably goes wrong and the rest of us pay for that.  Doesn't he see the irony of whining about passing costs to his consumers while at the same time passing healthcare costs off to people who aren't even his consumers, (like me)?

In addition, its also hypocritical of the breadmakers to rail against government-mandated costs, while quietly accepting the benefits of government subsidies.  In this case, the agriculture subsidies that go into the grains they use to make bread.

The real problem is our failure to embrace some form of single payer, and remove the connection of health insurance to employment.....but thats socialism to people like you.