If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(CBS Las Vegas)   Vegas employer follows up with his threat to fire people if Obama wins   (lasvegas.cbslocal.com) divider line 604
    More: Asinine, Republican, obama, owners, fires, employees  
•       •       •

37496 clicks; posted to Main » on 08 Nov 2012 at 2:52 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



604 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-11-08 06:33:33 PM

Buffalo77: Flab


relcec: Flab: Wook: LOL @ you farkers. You guys doing the criticizing are obviously all successful businessmen that have built companies from the ground up....

Back in he real world.... My friend has 17 employees. He was planning to purchase 200K in equipment and hire 3 more people. However, his premiums to pay for Obamacare for his employees rose 40%. He is not hiring the 3 people and he's not buying the new equipment.

Elections do have consequences.

Go ahead and proudly wear your ignorance on your lapel and /mock away.

Your friend needs to fire his accountant.

If he was planning on hiring three more employees and buy $200,000 in new equipment, it's because he was planning on getting more business where that new equipment and these new hires would more than pay for themselves, or else he wouldn't have made that investment in the first place.

Also, the insurance premiums going up 40% means they went from being 5% of an employee's salary to being 7% of an employee's salary, or something equivalent.

If he's willing to forego $300,000 in increased revenues over a 2% increase in expenses, he's a moron.

why do you think health insurance is a 2% increase in expense? I personally know of a company that spends close to 11k per employee on health insurance in the Milwaukee area (they came to a company do work for sometimes and asked them if we created a selfpay insurance policy how much a year). if they are similar to the rest of their industry, wages are by far their biggest expense and they probably pay around the median wage in that area which I'm just guessing could be close to 42k per year. now this company was full of older fat wisconsin males who were none to healthy, but look at the f*cking census tables, america is older than it has ever been before an insurance is extremely expensive even for healthy single people.

in order for your estimation of the average employee healthcare expense to be worth 5% of their total salary those employees would have to be makin ...

Ok. fine. I admit I don't know how much health insurance costs that employer. Let's use your numbers.

11k in premiums for a salary of 42k. Each employee costs the guy $53K/year.
Premiums go up by 40%, that means that each employee now costs him $4.4k more per year.

$4400/53000 = 8.3%

So let me rephrase what I wrote earlier:

If he's willing to forego $300,000 in increased revenues over an 8% increase in expenses, he's a moron.


Where did the $300,000 amount come from and what is the guys gross margin.


Guesstimate that the 3 new employees are paid 30,000/yr. Plus the cost of the machinery.

As I said, he wouldn't invest unless he thought his investment would pay off. Sure, he could figure that the investment would pay off in 5 years, or 10 years, but I was trying to keep the book keeping simple as I figures that a company with 17 employees would have a large enough cash flow to pay for the investment up front.
 
2012-11-08 06:33:50 PM

MrHappyRotter: Four years ago I had a thriving business selling saltwater and freshwater snails to people with saltwater and freshwater pufferfish (puffers eat snails). I had almost 42 employees, not including myself, my wife and our four children who helped out with the day to day operation. Once Obama was elected, I ended up having to pay taxes on our earnings, and when I realized how much free money I was just handing away (MY HARD EARNED CASH), I decided it was better to shut down and let my employees go.

It was the best decision of my life and I would do it again if I had the chance.


I guess you could say his puffer feeding business *puts on sunglasses* shriveled up.

/YEEEEEAAAAAAHHHHHHH!!!!
 
2012-11-08 06:38:03 PM

Slam1263: Meh. Boeing announced thousands of cuts yesterday.

Me? Glad the douche bag won, no, the other douche bag, keeps me in business.

Got a $500 donation at my site this morning, "just to keep up the good work".

Oh, I will, and as my skills progress, hilarity will ensue.


Wow $500 bucks to regurgitate Daily Caller, Fox News and Drudge links? I'm in the wrong line of work.
 
2012-11-08 06:39:06 PM

Rapmaster2000: fnordfocus: Rapmaster2000: I was going to make $251,000 next year, but my accountant told me that I will be in a higher tax bracket and therefore make less money so I have decided to become a janitor instead.

Sounds pretty close to what many freepers are saying.

Quite honestly, I hope they all do go John Galt and open up some business opportunities for the rest of us.

Only a very small amount of humans possess the entrepreneurial spirit, dedication to hard work, high intelligence, and good old-fashioned gumption needed to run a landscaping business.

Someday we'll all GO GALT and you libs will be forced to pick up your own Mexicans at Home Depot.


cdn3.thomhartmann.com
Good luck with that.
 
2012-11-08 06:39:55 PM

semiotix: Eddy Gurge: The Right to Work Law states that joining a union cannot be a condition of employment. In other words, you cannot be forced to join a union to work somewhere. That is the sum total of it.

drop: Nonsense. "Right to work" means that I, as an employee, cannot be *forced* to join a union if I join a unionized shop, and that is *all* it means.

CujoQuarrel: Right to work means you cannot be forced to join a union as a requirement for employment.
Where do you get that it interferes in how a union spends it's money.

Thank you all. You're all wrong.

"Union shops" and "closed shops" are what you're describing. They have been illegal since Taft-Hartley passed in 1947.

Let me say that again. The "problem" of people being forced to join unions has not existed in this country since the Truman administration.


No, again, you are wrong again. A "Right to work" state is exactly as was pointed out to you. Taft-Hartley only affects the Government. Right to work means employees cannot be forced to join a union as a condition of employment, and only about half the states are RTW, closed shops exist today in the other half.
 
2012-11-08 06:40:46 PM

semiotix: Let me say that again. The "problem" of people being forced to join unions has not existed in this country since the Truman administration.


Tell that to my school teacher brother.
 
2012-11-08 06:42:27 PM

sdd2000: You left out the fact that companies that are at the 50-60 employee threshold will have to forgo the tax credit (which is especially true for those with a large number of lower paid workers) and I think you and they will find that the math adds up better to give the employees access to health care.


Do you have a link with information on that? This is a sincere question. I did a quick Google and couldn't come up with anything specific, and I'd like to see how it affects the math.
 
2012-11-08 06:44:49 PM

semiotix: Eddy Gurge: The Right to Work Law states that joining a union cannot be a condition of employment. In other words, you cannot be forced to join a union to work somewhere. That is the sum total of it.

drop: Nonsense. "Right to work" means that I, as an employee, cannot be *forced* to join a union if I join a unionized shop, and that is *all* it means.

CujoQuarrel: Right to work means you cannot be forced to join a union as a requirement for employment.
Where do you get that it interferes in how a union spends it's money.

Thank you all. You're all wrong.

...

The plain-text definition of this basic term can be found here...


Okay, let's read it. Oh, hey, it says exactly what those "wrong" guys said.
 
2012-11-08 06:46:22 PM

Thunderpipes: You want universal health insurance? Fine. Do that. But tax everyone for it, don't make people pay for their own insurance AND pay for someone elses'. That is the whole thing libs don't get.


I find this statement abso-farking-lutely hilarious.
The left wing "libs" would love -- LOVE -- to have the government pay for health care by taxation, preferably running it through a single-payer system. This Obamacare compromise that we have came about because you conservatives were the ones who absolutely could not stand to even have a government option that the supposedly more efficient HMOs would have to compete with. So Obama took Obamacare from a plan that conservatives drew up, and now you have the gall to say that liberals don't get it because we arrived at a Republican plan because of conservative obstructionist obstinence? If that isn't the most pathetic pile of irony-filled BS I've ever heard, I don't know what is.
 
2012-11-08 06:47:00 PM

Vodka Zombie:
If you haven't learned by now, Republicans politicians lie.

It's all they do.

It's all they have,

Their day consists of being lied to while listening to the radio. Being lied to while watching TV. They lie to each other.

They have so many shared delusions, it's actually kind of funny.


FTFY
 
2012-11-08 06:47:41 PM

BgJonson79: TheR0CK: Wook: LOL @ you farkers. You guys doing the criticizing are obviously all successful businessmen that have built companies from the ground up....

Back in he real world.... My friend has 17 employees. He was planning to purchase 200K in equipment and hire 3 more people. However, his premiums to pay for Obamacare for his employees rose 40%. He is not hiring the 3 people and he's not buying the new equipment.

Elections do have consequences.

Go ahead and proudly wear your ignorance on your lapel and /mock away.

Bullshait

The only way Obamacare would cost him any more money would be..

1. He is not providing any healthcare for his employees right now.
2. He doesn't plan to.

Bottom line is, if you are a business owner you should care enough about the employees you hire to plan and budget
for providing healthcare for them. It's terribly simple.

But isn't that why people shop at Wal-mart? Not paying for that makes the product cheaper, and people ALWAYS go cheaper, for right or wrong.


Walmart is not a small business.
 
2012-11-08 06:50:08 PM

This text is now purple: bunner: Profedius: Sure it is great to help the poor, but let us help them to no longer be poor instead of just barely keeping them alive.

I agree. And how exactly do we do that when anybody with any capital investments demands more money than last year, every year, for less expenses, pays almost no taxes and thinks that having a 60' Hattaras is way more important than the jobs they just eradicated to buy it?

You don't. You just watch more filthy rich people shove more money up their ass ends, and pay less taxes and buy more toys while they sack the people who bring the money in the door.

Endless growth is a myth and if you insist on eating the whole pizza, my family actually DOES get the box for supper. And so far, that hasn't worked out.

Give a man a fish and he'll eat for a day. Teach a man to fish and he'll eat for a lifetime. Put a 40' high barbed wire fence around the fishing hole and it doesn't much make a difference.

[i1.kym-cdn.com image 769x595]


Hey bro, if you do a meme reply, at least make it relavent. The "We got a bad ass over here" is in response to internet tough guys.
 
2012-11-08 06:54:06 PM

semiotix: Eddy Gurge: The Right to Work Law states that joining a union cannot be a condition of employment. In other words, you cannot be forced to join a union to work somewhere. That is the sum total of it.

drop: Nonsense. "Right to work" means that I, as an employee, cannot be *forced* to join a union if I join a unionized shop, and that is *all* it means.

CujoQuarrel: Right to work means you cannot be forced to join a union as a requirement for employment.
Where do you get that it interferes in how a union spends it's money.

Thank you all. You're all wrong.

"Union shops" and "closed shops" are what you're describing. They have been illegal since Taft-Hartley passed in 1947.

Let me say that again. The "problem" of people being forced to join unions has not existed in this country since the Truman administration.

"Right to work" laws prevent or interfere with otherwise lawful collective bargaining practices, including negotiating fees. Negotiating fees are not "union dues," do not make a worker a union member, and are by definition limited to the actual costs of the negotiation. This is a pretty good way of crippling or decertifying a union, since it basically makes union dues a charity donation from members to nonmembers. (Union members generally resent this kind of socialist redistribution of wealth.)

The plain-text definition of this basic term can be found here. Union types and anti-union types disagree furiously over whether these laws are good things or not. But they at least know what the words mean.


I am struggling with whether you are being a troll, being willfully ignorant, or are a union shill. I'll bite once.

READ YOUR OWN LINK. ---> "A "right-to-work" law is a statute in the United States of America that prohibits union security agreements, or agreements between labor unions and employers that govern the extent to which an established union can require employees' membership, payment of union dues, or fees as a condition of employment, either before or after hiring. Right-to-work laws exist in twenty-three U.S. states, mostly in the southern and western United States. Such laws are allowed under the 1947 federal Taft-Hartley Act."

It's right there in the first paragraph. As has been said by many previous to myself in trying to educate you, Right-to-Work means that the Union can not prohibit the employer from hiring people who refuse to join the union, and can not likewise force the employer to collect dues from the paychecks of those same employees who don't want to pay. Right to work is absolutely NOT in effect across the entire US.

"Right to Work" was only one facet of Taft-Hartley.
 
2012-11-08 06:54:25 PM

BHK: TheR0CK
Bottom line is, if you are a business owner you should care enough about the employees you hire to plan and budget
for providing healthcare for them. It's terribly simple.

Why "should" someone do that? Why do you want to force your morals onto others? Do you like it when Republicans want to force their moral views on birth control and abortion and homosexuality on you? What, objectively, makes your viewpoints morally superior to that of a Republican such that it is righteous to force those morals, through the police power of the state, on others?


Who said anything about morals.

Health care for uninsured is paid for by the insured, the providers charge more to compensate for what they lost treating the
uninsured, then the insurance company passes the rising costs on to US through higher premiums. This is not a terribly difficult
concept to grasp.

Morals have nothing to do with it.

But troll on anyway... Try harder.
 
2012-11-08 06:57:46 PM

drop: orbister: drop: My concern is centered entirely on the fact that I intentionally opted *out* of health insurance to try and save the small company I work for some money. This is the third time I've done this for an employer. Under the ACA, I'm going to get fined for this behavior starting in 2014

Who pays if you get sick? Or are you willing to die, slowly and painfully if necessary, so save your employer some money?

I'm willing to die quickly and relatively painlessly if it's that or a life of drugs and/or other treatments.


What if it is something curable but expensive?
Cancer can be beaten, absolutely. I have more than one family member who has done it. It requires expensive but temporary treatments, not a lifetime of drugs. Or what about simple severe injury, say, due to a car accident? Needing to take a trip in an ambulance to emergency surgery and spending days in recovery is an extremely expensive proposition, but it certainly doesn't necessitate spending your life on drugs. Without insurance, other people are left paying your bill because the hospital never gets paid for your treatment.
 
2012-11-08 06:58:39 PM
A Las Vegas business owner with 114 employees random anonymous late-shift french fry technician tells right-wing-AM-radio shock jock he fired 22 imaginary workers today, apparently as a direct result of President Obama's re-election.

"David" (he asked to remain anonymous for obvious reasons) told Host Kevin Wall on 100.5 KXNT that "elections have consequences"


Nice reporting, CBS Las Vegas, but you missed the real story: Obama is instituting taxpayer-funded slave reparations to the tune of $150,000 to every living black American. Why is the liberal Main Stream MSM Media ignoring this?
 
2012-11-08 06:59:21 PM

Cybernetic: The UK has universal health care. So, residents pay nothing out of pocket when they go to the doctor. What they DO pay is painfully high income tax rates (20% on the first £35,000, 40% above that), plus 20% VAT on everything that they buy. Consumer goods average twice the price of comparable items in the U.S. Gasoline is three times as expensive.


Note that those income tax levels are after a tax free allowance of £8,105.

It's entirely possible that they pay more for their "free" health care than we pay for ours.

The NHS costs roughly £100bn per annum, providing full and unlimited cover to 63m people. That's about £1,600 per head, which is $2,500. Total US healthcare costs seem to be about $2.6tr at the moment, which for 312m people is $8,300 per head.

So our system costs less than a third of yours per head. Or, to look at it another way, our GDP is about £1.5tr and yours is about £15tr, so we spend 7% of GDP on healthcare and you spend 17% of your GDP on yours, heading for 20% by the end of the decade

German and France spend around 10% of GDP on universal cover. They both use a mixture of private insurance and state cover (private health insurance is a very minor thing in the UK).
 
2012-11-08 07:06:47 PM
Just chiming in saying my health insurance premiums have not gone up in the two years since the ACA started going into effect. I haven't lost any coverage either. I also work for a medium size extremely conservative company with about 1200 employees.
 
2012-11-08 07:12:12 PM
If true, I'm sure that fact that 71% of Hispanics voted for Obama had nothing to do with his decision to fire 22 Hispanic employees .
 
2012-11-08 07:14:08 PM

cards fan by association: Just chiming in saying my health insurance premiums have not gone up in the two years since the ACA started going into effect. I haven't lost any coverage either. I also work for a medium size extremely conservative company with about 1200 employees.



Yeah me neither and I work for a big corporation. In fact I haven't had any negative repercussions from the Obama administration at all other than having to listen to the Obamically Deranged now and then. I work, my retirement fund is way up from 2008, and I do whatever I want.
 
2012-11-08 07:14:08 PM
Also, folks crying about higher premiums tend to forget the requirement that health insurance companies have to spend 85% of the premium on YOU. So while higher premiums do mean higher profits for health insurance companies, it also means more money has to be spent on you.

Win/win
 
2012-11-08 07:15:38 PM

Abox: cards fan by association: Just chiming in saying my health insurance premiums have not gone up in the two years since the ACA started going into effect. I haven't lost any coverage either. I also work for a medium size extremely conservative company with about 1200 employees.


Yeah me neither and I work for a big corporation. In fact I haven't had any negative repercussions from the Obama administration at all other than having to listen to the Obamically Deranged now and then. I work, my retirement fund is way up from 2008, and I do whatever I want.


The rate on return on my 401k is 11.9%. Man, the economy sure sucks, huh?
 
2012-11-08 07:19:57 PM
Reality:
It's winter, business is slow, I want to make an (R) point to my employees and whomever I can get to believe it, I'll rehire them if business picks up next year... and the cash saved is not going back into the business, but to bank it or catch up on debt. 

It's Obama's fault.
 
2012-11-08 07:22:13 PM

Stoker: Reality:
It's winter, business is slow, I want to make an (R) point to my employees and whomever I can get to believe it, I'll rehire them if business picks up next year... and the cash saved is not going back into the business, but to bank it or catch up on debt. 

It's Obama's fault.


Party of Personal Responsibility everyone!
 
2012-11-08 07:23:32 PM
I explained to them a month ago that if Obama gets in office that the regulations for Obamacare are gonna hurt our business, and I'm gonna have to make provisions...

So you're too bad at your job to understand how self-insurance pools work and that's Obama's fault?

Okay. Well, enjoy being eaten alive by your competitors who didn't choose to be enormously whiny biatches about largely inconsequential things. Not everybody is cut out to be a leader. Your next job as a Wal Mart greeter will probably suit you better anyway.
 
2012-11-08 07:24:53 PM

drop: ristst: drop: Healthcare is offered by my company. I do not participate in the program because I don't need it

That may be true.....for now. Just bear in mind that at some point in the future you *will* need it....unless you you suddenly keel over dead. Or if not you then someone in your family will need it.

/Not trying to troll....simply stating a fact.
/My wife - who was in great health - suddenly developed congestive heart failure at age 37, and required open heart surgery. Luckily she was covered on my plan. Even with insurance, we ended paying around $15k out of pocket.

I'm not one of those fools that thinks I will never need health care, no matter what. I'm old enough to know that I'm not immortal and that my health will eventually begin to fail. For most of my adult life (I'm 35), I have gladly participated in company healthcare programs. A few times, for a year or two here and there, I've opted out. To save myself money, the company money, or both.

Now that they are attempting to take the choice away from me and force me to participate in the system, I am disgusted, and my disgust compels me to resist.

Best wishes to yourself and your family.


I feel compelled to point out that in this thread, you have taken both the position of (eventually) being forced into a healthcare program you don't want participate in, and bemoaning all the people who will "game the system" by not joining this same health program until they have a sudden immense cost.

And what a previous poster quoted to you is absolutely correct- (part of) the reasoning behind the ACA is that it is no longer acceptable for everyone who willfully purchases health insurance to cover the costs of a select few who gamble with how likely they are to need coverage and then get caught in a big accident or suddenly have heart failure, etc...

/26 and employed with health insurance
// It is not good health insurance but it's the best option I can find atm
 
Ant
2012-11-08 07:34:23 PM

Cargo: Godscrack: The Butthurt Remains The Same
And Butthurt Goes On
Endless Butthurt
Whole Lotta Butthurt
Smells Like Teen Butthurt

Butthurt and Confused


House of the Rising Butthurt
Ziggy Butthurt
Welcome to the Butthurt
 
2012-11-08 07:35:32 PM

mainstreet62: ristst: give me doughnuts: The comments below the article are a real Fistful of Derp.

Ya beat me to it. Man that's some good butthurt there. Better than Fox News Election nite coverage butthurt.

Yeah, I really wanted to post this in response in the Disqus section:

[24.media.tumblr.com image 425x618]


Holy shiat, that's awesome.
 
2012-11-08 07:38:05 PM

cards fan by association: Also, folks crying about higher premiums tend to forget the requirement that health insurance companies have to spend 85% of the premium on YOU. So while higher premiums do mean higher profits for health insurance companies, it also means more money has to be spent on you.

Win/win


It'll be win/win the day that aspirins aren't 14.00, band aids aren't 39.00 and you can actually get useful treatment for less than the cost of a good, used pickup truck.
 
2012-11-08 07:38:34 PM

FarkingReading: I'm a VP at a company that makes digital camera parts. I don't know much about that part of it, which is why I oversee HR, PR and security.

We've been planning a massive expansion into Maryland. We'd be moving about 50 employees' families there and hiring roughly 75 more.

But because Obama won, we're disbanding the company, loading guns and plan on running through the streets murdering as many people as possible. We're then going to build a bonfire and roast the bodies and eat them. I'm going to go after children and puppies exclusively. "Operation Obama Caused This" begins in 26 minutes.


Dude [or Dudess], can I gank this for a bit of e-mail FW:FW: trollery?

Cuz it's funny.
 
2012-11-08 07:41:05 PM

GiantBat: Not_Todd: I'm sure all 22 will get green jobs right away. Sweeping up dust bunnies at Solyndra or some other failed eco-firm Bam Bam threw our money at.

Maybe they can get a job mopping up the tears of Romney voters.


I know I'm late to the thread but OMG owned so hard. Love it.
 
2012-11-08 07:41:05 PM
You know what I think? I think that medical training should be a part of the curriculum of every public school on earth up to at least the "useful EMT or nursing" level, and could then be pursued by students as a major, alter, if they wish. That's some proactive preventative care for your ass, yo, and it would start dismantling this elitist, guild cloak bullsh*t surrounding medicine.
 
Ant
2012-11-08 07:41:34 PM

drop: teeny: drop: I intentionally opted *out* of health insurance to try and save the small company I work for some money. This is the third time I've done this for an employer.

wat

I guess I could understand if you were working for your buddy's business that he launched 8 months ago. But what other possible reason could you have for being so illogically altruistic?

It's not altruistic. It saves the company money, and it saves me money (at least until 2014). I'm a healthy guy.


I don't even know what to say...
 
2012-11-08 07:42:07 PM
He employs "mostly hispanics" and he pays them with a real, official paycheck? They would receive insurance and other benefits?

You're doing it wrong.
 
2012-11-08 07:43:08 PM

Ant: drop: teeny: drop: I intentionally opted *out* of health insurance to try and save the small company I work for some money. This is the third time I've done this for an employer.

wat

I guess I could understand if you were working for your buddy's business that he launched 8 months ago. But what other possible reason could you have for being so illogically altruistic?

It's not altruistic. It saves the company money, and it saves me money (at least until 2014). I'm a healthy guy.

I don't even know what to say...


He fails to understand what insurance is.
 
2012-11-08 07:44:52 PM

vegasj: It is amazing how liberal Fark has become...

Had Romney won, and some business owner went on record saying he is forced to let people go due to Romney winning...

You bastards would be all over that person's cock saying he "did what he had to do"


Not true at all. I'm very selective about whose cocks I get all over.
 
2012-11-08 07:45:49 PM
Finally made it back in here.

Thanks to all y'all who recognized my cranial malfunction (at will vs right to work). Today I has teh dum.
 
2012-11-08 07:46:31 PM

bunner: vegasj: It is amazing how liberal Fark has become...

Had Romney won, and some business owner went on record saying he is forced to let people go due to Romney winning...

You bastards would be all over that person's cock saying he "did what he had to do"

[www.frontroomcinema.com image 400x400]


It's always amusing when hardcore conservatives try to imagine what "you libs" would do if the circumstances were reversed.
 
2012-11-08 07:49:38 PM

BHK: TheR0CK
Bottom line is, if you are a business owner you should care enough about the employees you hire to plan and budget
for providing healthcare for them. It's terribly simple.

Why "should" someone do that? Why do you want to force your morals onto others? Do you like it when Republicans want to force their moral views on birth control and abortion and homosexuality on you? What, objectively, makes your viewpoints morally superior to that of a Republican such that it is righteous to force those morals, through the police power of the state, on others?


The fact that liberal morality is about preventing others from suffering?
 
Ant
2012-11-08 07:51:08 PM

drop: You also entirely missed the point of the post, which is that it was my choice (agree or disagree with it) to participate in the market or not. In 2014 that choice is effectively taken away and becomes "participate or pay a fine" which is simply outrageous.


And if you someday get sick, we're not going to just let you die, even though you have contributed nothing to the pot.
 
2012-11-08 07:58:57 PM

bunner: cards fan by association: Also, folks crying about higher premiums tend to forget the requirement that health insurance companies have to spend 85% of the premium on YOU. So while higher premiums do mean higher profits for health insurance companies, it also means more money has to be spent on you.

Win/win

It'll be win/win the day that aspirins aren't 14.00, band aids aren't 39.00 and you can actually get useful treatment for less than the cost of a good, used pickup truck.


I agree. That's the health provider though, not the insurance company. There are parts of the ACA that will reward providers based on quality instead of quantity of services provided. Hopefully that helps just a little bit.
 
2012-11-08 08:02:45 PM

cards fan by association: Hopefully that helps just a little bit.


Yeah, maybe. but we are well pat the point of hoping for little things that help a tiny but and well into the time when we should be f*cking well demanding large things that help a lot and discarding the people who refuse to comply. I have lost my optimism for the notion that if we just keep driving towards the cliff and tap the brakes, occasionally, we'll learn to fly as soon as we hit the edge of the cliff. I hope I'm wrong and you're not.
 
2012-11-08 08:04:15 PM
My benefits coordinator has also sent out an I-O memo every year since the ACA that says "depending on the cost of health care after 2014, we may not be able to provide a health plan." What the willingly ignore is the fact that most of the provisions have already gone into effect OR the health insurance companies have already implemented the provisions required down the road in order to avoid a big hit all at once. So where is my big increase? In 2014, the "big" thing is the put a state-run insurance exchange where people can compare policies and providers in plain terms. Can someone explain to me how creating a more competitive marketplace for health care makes prices go up?
 
2012-11-08 08:06:27 PM

bunner: cards fan by association: Hopefully that helps just a little bit.

Yeah, maybe. but we are well pat the point of hoping for little things that help a tiny but and well into the time when we should be f*cking well demanding large things that help a lot and discarding the people who refuse to comply. I have lost my optimism for the notion that if we just keep driving towards the cliff and tap the brakes, occasionally, we'll learn to fly as soon as we hit the edge of the cliff. I hope I'm wrong and you're not.


Well, at least we're turning more towards the road and less towards the cliff. Regardless of how little the turn is...
 
2012-11-08 08:07:16 PM

bunner: cards fan by association: Hopefully that helps just a little bit.

Yeah, maybe. but we are well pat the point of hoping for little things that help a tiny but and well into the time when we should be f*cking well demanding large things that help a lot and discarding the people who refuse to comply. I have lost my optimism for the notion that if we just keep driving towards the cliff and tap the brakes, occasionally, we'll learn to fly as soon as we hit the edge of the cliff. I hope I'm wrong and you're not.


Lots of the reasons why medicine is so expensive in America is because the legislation around Medicare and other government programs has been intentionally written to prevent the government from being able to negotiate prices. Guess which party has ensured that this was included in such legislation?
 
2012-11-08 08:07:23 PM
Oh yeah, well I'm the sole owner of Massive Dynamic and since Obama won the election I'm going to hire so many new employees that I'm going to have to open a hole into another universe to import enough workers.

I posted it on Fark so it must be true.

/If this dude really dumped twenty-two employees, at least one of them is going to go to the press
//Unless he's counting cardboard cutouts in his mom's basement as "employees"
 
2012-11-08 08:13:41 PM

BHK: TheR0CK
Bottom line is, if you are a business owner you should care enough about the employees you hire to plan and budget
for providing healthcare for them. It's terribly simple.

Why "should" someone do that? Why do you want to force your morals onto others? Do you like it when Republicans want to force their moral views on birth control and abortion and homosexuality on you? What, objectively, makes your viewpoints morally superior to that of a Republican such that it is righteous to force those morals, through the police power of the state, on others?



Jesus was a big fan of healing the sick and helping the poor.

/Achievement Unlocked: Moral High Ground.
 
2012-11-08 08:16:53 PM
I highly recommend anyone who has not to visit healthcare.gov for a summary of the ACA. You might think it's biased but it's worth checking out. It might just relieve some of your fears.
 
2012-11-08 08:22:19 PM

garumph: Wook: LOL @ you farkers. You guys doing the criticizing are obviously all successful businessmen that have built companies from the ground up....

Back in he real world.... My friend has 17 employees. He was planning to purchase 200K in equipment and hire 3 more people. However, his premiums to pay for Obamacare for his employees rose 40%. He is not hiring the 3 people and he's not buying the new equipment.

Elections do have consequences.

Go ahead and proudly wear your ignorance on your lapel and /mock away.

hell, I'll mock away. Then someone else will hire those people and take the business that your friend is not doing. If there are customers out there people will set up and fill the need. You don't hire because of the cost of employees, you hire because you need resources to support your business.


Yup. I'm sick of this attitude where we're all supposed to revere business owners, however good or bad, like feudal lords living in castles above our shiatty little mud-huts. It's a two-way contract between employee and employer, and the same farking market forces that they claim are in play for everything else are in play for employment.

If there is a market for your product, your demand will increase and you will need more employees. Businesses don't just go around hiring people because taxes are low, and they don't just fire them because taxes are high.

If you're going around firing employees because you don't understand your future expenses or the law, you deserve to fail, and the people you fired will be better off working for someone else.
 
2012-11-08 08:26:19 PM

lordjupiter: Yup. I'm sick of this attitude where we're all supposed to revere business owners, however good or bad, like feudal lords living in castles above our shiatty little mud-huts


But... but.. but, JOB CREATORS!1!! It's time we stopped staring at our feet like 8 year olds who just broke a lamp whenever some flatulent dipwad in a 3,000.00 suit starts getting harrumphy.
 
Displayed 50 of 604 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report