Fiction wrote:
:palm: I stated the factors that make CNN's analysis far from reality. But it doesn't take a Ph.D in economics to understand that the cost incurred to Papa Johns is not solely through a penalty. I can say that they're wrong, and why they're wrong, without doing a complete write up on the topic. The burden of proof on the subject they're discussing, does not fall on me. (no reason to go get a degree to disagree with a bias network.)
My claim was simply that CNN is wrong if they are saying that's the only factor that Papa Johns is dealing with when it comes to raising cost. Why is it my job to educate you on economics and how the free market operates, or the specifics of a piece of legislation? If you take issue with me disagreeing with their math, than isn't it your responsibility to educate yourself and prove me wrong with all the standards that you ask me to provide? I'm only saying they are wrong because their use of a single factor to determine if the cost per pizza is justified. Clearly the economy, and especially in a large business with so many variables, it is not going to be as simple as a single direct penalty... It's a show... They're putting up numbers, their viewers just soak it up, and don't question it, this is how the media operates... I find it irritating that you constantly talk about my bias, and try to prove your arguments with this MSM bias/brainwashed house hold news shit. You were the one that submitted this video as the end all discussion to this argument.. I just pointed out the flaw in it's logic.
But you haven't pointed out a flaw in it's logic. You've said it's use of a single cost factor does not reflect what the bill will actually impact but you haven't said how or why. You then throw together some other statements like inflation that you can't back up and now are saying the burden of proof, basically why anything you are saying is grounded in actual facts, does not rest with you. Since you are simply saying it's wrong without offering any proof and are insisting that the burden of proof doesn't rest with you then how have you even pointed out anything. Your reasoning using inflation was already proven wrong and I will cite EU/US financial reports to prove that even in a more socialized economy inflation is pretty much the same (that this bill is even that much of an increase in socialization over the current system is an entirely different argument) but aside from that your reason rest on the vague statement of "other factors" which you have repeatedly declined to mention.
We know how the bill will effect businesses directly. They will have to provide health insurance to full time employees that they are directly responsible for. That is the
only form of monetary penalty that the bill would
directly impose on Papa Johns.
Those are the facts. The argument is that Papa Johns should not have to raise it's cost or cut it's employees hours as they will actually not have to pay that much money to adhere to the bill based on those facts.
You are saying that there are more factors related directly to the bill that makes this type of assessment misleading which implies that the actual cost burden on Papa Johns will be higher. That might not be what you're trying to imply and maybe you are simply stating that the logic is misleading even if it won't actually change how much Papa Johns will pay and if that is the case then it doesn't really matter in the end because Papa Johns will still be paying the same amount of money and saying it's prices will have to go up so I'm going to assume you are talking about the former position.
If you won't say what these "other factors" are how can I possibly prove you wrong. If you don't say what they are how can I educate myself or even understand your reasoning. You keep saying things like "clearly" and "as we all know" but then you follow it up with a vague conjecture. I posted that video as a proof to back up the math the someone already did in this thread, that lots of people have already done online. It's not a be all end all it's just pointing out that more people are coming to the conclusion that Papa's math is off. You're saying it's not but still haven't said why and you won't say why because it's my job to prove the math that I agree with wrong in order to prove you right?
@BuDo no one is making you read this and I don't think it's interrupting anything so...go somewhere else? It's like people making shitty comments on a youtube video as if someone forced them to sit down and watch the whole thing. This is still something thats being discussed and debated in the country and it's not even like it was off the front page here which is, i realize, a bit hard to do these days but still.