Papa John’s Pizza: To Raise Prices To Cover Health Care Mandate

Tiffany Hsu of Los Angeles Times wrote an informant of article on August 8 about the fact that Papa John’s pizza is going to raise pizza prices if Obamacare goes into full effect. I have been known to enjoy a pizza or two from Papa John’s, not to mention the garlic sauce and the peppers that come with it. The pizzas are worth every nickel, dime, and quarter that you pay for them. Tiffany writes, Get ready to pay more for your Papa John’s pizza if “Obamacare” goes into full effect … a whopping 15 to 20 cents more. John Schnatter, chief executive of the pizza chain, is bashing President Obama’s healthcare reform law as a policy that will force the company to choose between its customers and its investors. And if the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act rolls out as planned in 2014, Schnatter’s strategy is “of course … to pass that cost on the consumer in order to protect our shareholders’ best interest,” he said in a recent conference call. Schnatter estimates that the legislation will cost Papa John’s about 11 cents to 14 cents per pizza, which equates to 15 cents to 20 cents per order. An average delivery charge runs $1.75 to $2.50. “We’re not supportive of Obamacare like most businesses in our industry but our business model...

Read More

Humankind: Bolder Giving

Last week as I was driving from North Carolina to Philadelphia I was listening to NPR’s humankind (one of my favorite radio programs) which was discussing the role of charities and giving. Some people give no charity at all. But of Americans who do, the average family donation is 2-3% per year. This program examines how people arrive at the amount of their charitable contributions, where the money is contributed to, and what holds donors back from giving more, especially if they could afford to without hardship. We profile an initiative known as Bolder Giving, which asks those who are inclined to donate to charity to dig a little deeper, because the extent of need is great, and sometimes goes unmet. We hear from Christopher and Anne Ellinger, co-founders of the movement, who cite their own decision in their twenties to give away most of a family inheritance, because they felt – even on a modest income – they had “more than enough”. We also hear from Kathy LeMay, who tells her provocative story of growing up poor and now raising hundreds of millions for charity. She observes that true charity is more than just writing a check; but also a way of giving from the heart. Take a listen to the program by streaming or downloading the...

Read More

Charity and Taxation; The Economist: Sweetened Charity

There’s a very engaging article in the June 9 issue of the economist that deals with charities and their tax-exempt status. here are  two small paragraphs that I thought were very interesting for consideration. America has the most generous tax incentives for charity, and has the highest giving as a proportion of GDP, at 1.67%, according to a rare comparative study by Britain’s Charities Aid Foundation. Britain’s tax breaks for charity are the next-most-generous, and it had the second-highest share of charity to GDP, 0.73%, followed by Australia, 0.69%, which also has significant tax breaks. By contrast, the relatively weakly incentivised Germans give only 0.22% of GDP. The correlation is not perfect, though; despite their generous tax breaks, the French give just 0.14% of GDP. Overall, American donors give more than half of their charitable donations to religious organisations, according to a study by Mr Reich of Stanford University. Only a small part of total American giving was in any sense redistributive from rich to poorer people, the study concluded. The churches, synagogues and so on that received most of the money were typically attended by the donor, and thus could be interpreted more as a membership fee than an act of charity (the study did not include religiously linked charities engaged in good works under the heading of...

Read More

Get a real job! The note with 1 per cent tip left by wealthy banker after $133 lunch as an insult to the 99 per cent

Just when you may have thought the ongoing battle between the 99% and the 1% was dying down, it may have been reignited. A wealthy banker left a $1.33 tip on a $133 lunch at the True Food Kitchen restaurant in Newport Beach, California. To add insult to injury the word “tip” was circled on the receipt, and the banker wrote “get a real job” on the bill. The picture of the receipt was taken and uploaded to the blog Future Ex-Banker by a person who was dining with the anonymous banker. As expected, the blog received a lot of attention and has now been taken down. The author of the blog wrote, “mention the 99% in my boss’ presence and feel his wrath. So proudly does he wear his 1% badge of honor that he tips exactly 1% every time he feels the server doesn’t sufficiently bow down to his holiness.” People online who had a chance to see the blog post before it went offline and those who have been made aware of it on social media outlets are outraged. One person called the tip a “tale of greed and contempt,” and another referred to it as “arrogance personified.” The Web’s general reaction to this story is eerily similar to an almost identical 1% vs. 99% scenario...

Read More

Zakaria: Mitt, you need to worry about the very poor

Remember Mitt Romney’s infamous “poor” comment? If not, here it is again: “I’m not concerned about the very poor. We have a safety net there. If it needs repair, I’ll fix it. I’m not concerned about the very rich; they’re doing just fine. I’m concerned about the very heart of America, the 90-95% of Americans who right now are struggling.” Well, it got me thinking: Romney was actually being honest about Americans in general. We don’t – none of us – spend much time thinking about the very poor. But we should, because we have a real problem in this area, an economic, political and moral problem. By Romney’s calculations, if 95% of Americans fall in the middle class, then there must be less than 5% of Americans who qualify as poor. Well, no. The number from the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, the association of the world’s developed economies, is actually 17.3%. And how do we compare with other rich countries? We rank 31st of the 34 countries that make up the OECD in terms of the percentage of our population that qualifies as poor. Of the 34 member states, only Mexico, Chile and Israel are worse off than we are. The UK (at 11%), Germany (8.9%) and France (7.2%) are all much lower. The OECD average...

Read More