free health care

[ElasticNinja]

Why shouldn't we blame employers? A healthcare plan is something these people should have already been providing their employees.

I disagree, a company should have to contribute a percentage of healthcare costs at most, and certainly not the premiums that exist in the US.

It is a bit like wanting every employee to get a company car.

That said, I understand the rationale, but a non-employer based system would be preferable.

 

[SiempreTuna]

I disagree, a company should have to contribute a percentage of healthcare costs at most

So .. who is supposed to pay for it?

The options are:

It's a benefit - paid for by the employer

The workers are paid enough so they can afford to pay for it themselves - again, paid for by the employer.

It's paid for from taxes - again, paid for by the employer.

There's no way around it: the employer has to pay. There is no-one else.

and certainly not the premiums that exist in the US.

Yeah, we've covered this: the main reason premiums are so high is because not everyone pays their share. To reduce premiums you have to make everyone pay.

That's why the GOP policy of Obamacare / Romneycare makes everyone pay. Again: no other alternative.

It is a bit like wanting every employee to get a company car

It's nothing like that. Very few people need a company car. Everyone needs health care.

a non-employer based system would be preferable.

See above: one way or another, the employer pays. There is no other source of income.

 

[ItnStln511]

Come on! I really need to spell this out? I know the Republicans are the party of the willfully ignorant, but that's taking it too far ..

Actually that would be the democrats. All they want to do is tax and spend, and offer nothing in return.

This is a perfect example of why I hate US politics. When you run out of patience making a logical argument you start blaming the other party (Republicans in this instance). It's not about finding a solution, it is about BLAME. It does not matter if it is Republicans blaming Democrats or Democrats blaming Republicans...it simply degenerates into a lame mud slinging match between adults acting as if they were children. The same thing is happening in Congress right now...just at an elevated level on a much grader, screwed up scale...

But no one will blame the democrats, they can do no wrong.

 

[ItnStln511]

Please tell me why someone who works their whole life and diligently saves has a responsibility to bail out someone who saved nothing. How is a society where the responsible people carry the burden for the irresponsible ones a good society?

No one wants to claim responsibility.

I'm not hoping for failure. The failure, fines, and increased costs are already written into law. I just know that until people experience those things first hand they won't realize what is really going on. They had 4 years of miserable failure and ignored all evidence and logic and chose to punish the entire country more. People will continue to believe all of the lies until it hurts them personally, after that maybe they will listen to the truth next time. Things are going to have to get worse and hurt a lot more people before enough people wake up out of their fantasy world. Only then will America get back on track and return to prosperity.

Not really...they'll continue to blame the Republicans, because that's what obama is telling them to do.

 

[ItnStln511]

How is any of this worth it to help the select few? Sure it sucks to be them, but other than those with pre-existing conditions Obamacare helps no one and hurts millions of Americans.

But that's not what he's telling people. I agree with you, but as long as he's telling people that it's better for them, no one will believe otherwise.

The people who voted it into law opted out of it... What does that tell you :afraid:

It tells me that they're smarter than I originally thought!

But the government does it HORRIBLY wrong!! Perfect example... There are more homeless VETERANS than ILLEGAL ALIENS. What is wrong with that picture??? It wouldn't be nearly as big of an issue if the right people that needed help got it, not those that can't even legally live here anyways. Or what about the BILLIONS every year that is sent to help others in other countries before our government helps our own citizens.

The government is far too corrupt to be trusted with helping those who really need it.

Don't even get me started on the whole Veterans issue. I personally think that the VA needs to be completely overhauled from top to bottom. And ILLEGAL aliens...does anyone not know what ILLEGAL means?

 

[Gmash]

Actually, there is no public option, therefore nothing to opt out of, really. If you already have insurance, you keep it. If you don't, this helps you get it. Not that complicated. Unless you're suggesting Congress should go on Medicaid.

 

[A.Nonymous]

Why shouldn't we blame employers? A healthcare plan is something these people should have already been providing their employees. Like Papa John Schnatter, it would cost him 9¢ per pizza to give his employees healthcare. Instead he fires them and cuts back their hours. This guy is a multi millionaire! He lives in a freaking palace! And he pays his employees shit and won't give them healthcare. All these chains making record profits, and pulling this crap. Raising prices and telling customers to take it out on the wait staff by cutting back their tips! Ludicrous. What we need is a union for the fast food and restaurant industry, those workers are treated like dog meat.

Employers are never going to pay though. Ever. Why? Because at the end of the day they have a responsibility to their employees and their stockholders to make money and stay in business. A business that makes no money is soon closed.

At the beginning of the year certain tax cuts expired. The payroll tax went up ~2%. Employers across the board took the 2% hike in payroll costs and went on their way. No. That didn't happen. Instead everybody in America got a 2% pay cut. Why? Because those businesses are responsible to their stock holders at the end of the day and they will ALWAYS pass increased costs along to either their employees or their customers. Businesses that eat these costs out of their bottom line lose their ability to compete in the market place and are soon shuttered.

 

[SiempreTuna]

Employers are never going to pay though. Ever.

Err .. most already do. It's just a few greedy, whiney SOBs that don't.

Why? Because at the end of the day they have a responsibility to their employees and their stockholders to make money and stay in business. A business that makes no money is soon closed.

They also have a responsibility to pay their way and part of that, in the US, is providing health care for their employees. If they don't pay their way, they should go bust - the rest of society shouldn't have to pick up the tab.

everybody in America got a 2% pay cut

Really? Don't remember reading about that. At all. Anywhere. Maybe coz it never happened ..?

 

[A.Nonymous]

Err .. most already do. It's just a few greedy, whiney SOBs that don't.

They don't. They pass the cost along to their customer/employees. If Congress really, really, really wanted to fix this all they'd have to do is give employers a tax break for paying for healthcare for their employees. They do this already for retirement plans. Employers match employee funds because they get a tax break for doing so.

They also have a responsibility to pay their way and part of that, in the US, is providing health care for their employees. If they don't pay their way, they should go bust - the rest of society shouldn't have to pick up the tab.

They have no such responsibility. They have a responsibility to make money for their shareholders. That is it. Everything else spawns off of that. Why do corporations (in general) try to provide the best customer service? It makes money for their shareholders. Why do they do their best to retain the best and brightest employees? It makes money for their shareholders.

Really? Don't remember reading about that. At all. Anywhere. Maybe coz it never happened ..?

I'm a bit surprised you haven't noticed this. Go check your pay stuff from mid December and go check your most recent one. It's gone down. Not by much, but it's gone down.

 

[JimmyRayBob]

Really? Don't remember reading about that. At all. Anywhere. Maybe coz it never happened ..?

Payroll Tax Increase Weighs on Consumer Spending - ABC News

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/08/business/restored-payroll-tax-pinches-those-with-the-smallest-checks.html?_r=0

Payroll tax increase may nick consumer spending

 

[JimmyRayBob]

They also have a responsibility to pay their way and part of that, in the US, is providing health care for their employees. If they don't pay their way, they should go bust - the rest of society shouldn't have to pick up the tab.

?

I own a small business ... if Uncle Sam mandates that I have to pay for health insurance for everyone, I go bankrupt. Plain and simple. Then they don't get pay checks or insurance.

And then the "rest of society" as you put it ... has to pick up the tab.

 

[lightsleeper23]

I hope they do raise the minimum wage. At least then people who's greedy employers aren't giving them healthcare might able to get some.

If you have less than 50 employees, then you don't fall under the mandate. If you have more, then you're not really that small of a business are you? Yeah, it might hurt the bottom line of SOME businesses that are already scraping by, but most are making record profits and I don't feel one bit bad for them or their shareholders.

 

[ElasticNinja]

So .. who is supposed to pay for it?

The options are:

It's a benefit - paid for by the employer

The workers are paid enough so they can afford to pay for it themselves - again, paid for by the employer.

It's paid for from taxes - again, paid for by the employer.

There's no way around it: the employer has to pay. There is no-one else.

If it is paid by taxes then small employers will not have such a heavy burden however. Companies feeling the need to provide healthcare is an unfortunate weight imo. Healthcare should be the states responsibility, not employers. I mean before, employers used to educate workers kids, but its inefficient and cause a problem when there is no employer.

 

[chrlswltrs]

I hope they do raise the minimum wage. At least then people who's greedy employers aren't giving them healthcare might able to get some.

If you have less than 50 employees, then you don't fall under the mandate. If you have more, then you're not really that small of a business are you? Yeah, it might hurt the bottom line of SOME businesses that are already scraping by, but most are making record profits and I don't feel one bit bad for them or their shareholders.

Why should employers have to pay people more that have minimum education, minimum skills, minimum work ethic, and minimum usefulness?

If employers have to pay more, they have to raise prices, so everything will cost us more. If people want more money they are responsible for doing more that the minimum. It isn't a business owner's responsibility to pay more for people that don't want to work harder to earn more.

 

[lightsleeper23]

Why should employers have to pay people more that have minimum education, minimum skills, minimum work ethic, and minimum usefulness?

If employers have to pay more, they have to raise prices, so everything will cost us more. If people want more money they are responsible for doing more that the minimum. It isn't a business owner's responsibility to pay more for people that don't want to work harder to earn more.

Well you're automatically degrading the entire workforce of the U.S. Not everyone that has a minimum wage job has minimum work ethic. And I'd certainly contest your minimum usefulness claim. You flat out wouldn't be able to run your business without those workers, so in that aspect alone I'd say they're pretty useful.

But what it comes down to is, anyone who is working a full time job, even the least useful ones (which are still pretty useful to the employer who wants to operate a business), deserve a wage they can actually live on. As long as they're living within their means, nobody working full time should have to decide between paying their light bill, or eating for the last week of the month. They shouldn't have to go to the food bank just to get by.

 

[copestag]

But what it comes down to is, anyone who is working a full time job, even the least useful ones (which are still pretty useful to the employer who wants to operate a business), deserve a wage they can actually live on. As long as they're living within their means, nobody working full time should have to decide between paying their light bill, or eating for the last week of the month. They shouldn't have to go to the food bank just to get by.

this is where youre confused...... they dont "deserve" anything other than what they earn..... nobody is forced to spend their entire life at the bottom..... they choose to do so

as far as decisions to pay or eat...... if they have to make those decisions.... even on minimum wage.... they are probably living beyond their means

sometimes dinner is more important than a big screen or a new Iphone

 

[A.Nonymous]

Well you're automatically degrading the entire workforce of the U.S. Not everyone that has a minimum wage job has minimum work ethic. And I'd certainly contest your minimum usefulness claim. You flat out wouldn't be able to run your business without those workers, so in that aspect alone I'd say they're pretty useful.

But what it comes down to is, anyone who is working a full time job, even the least useful ones (which are still pretty useful to the employer who wants to operate a business), deserve a wage they can actually live on. As long as they're living within their means, nobody working full time should have to decide between paying their light bill, or eating for the last week of the month. They shouldn't have to go to the food bank just to get by.

The minimum work ethic and minimum usefulness are probably going too far, but in general the minimal skills and minimal education do apply. Let's be honest, you've got 2.2% of hourly employees who make minimum wage (and I've been one of them before), but half of them are 16-24 (kids/college students) and nearly 60% of them have no higher education. So the skills and education critiques would seem to apply. Just 1.2% of college grads actually make minimum wage. Statistically (and anecdotally as well if it means anything) most minimum wage workers are younger workers and/or those who have no education/skills/training.

There aren't a whole lot of people who are actually living on minimum wage and, it can be argued, the wage should reflect their skills and education. A worker with few or no skills and no education is not as valuable in the workplace.

 

[lightsleeper23]

this is where youre confused...... they dont "deserve" anything other than what they earn..... nobody is forced to spend their entire life at the bottom..... they choose to do so

as far as decisions to pay or eat...... if they have to make those decisions.... even on minimum wage.... they are probably living beyond their means

sometimes dinner is more important than a big screen or a new Iphone

You're assuming people are spending their entire life earning minimum wage. Most people move up eventually. While they are earning minimum wage, however long that is, they deserve a minimum wage that they can live on. No, a person making minimum wage shouldn't be buying a huge flat screen and an iPhone. But surely they should be able to have SOME TV and mobile phone...it is 2013 in America after all. Maybe a more modest sized standard definition TV, and a low end android? Besides those aren't the best excuses either way, because those are one time expenses, food and bills are monthly. If someone has trouble paying their bills in any given month, you cant always assume their TV or mobile phone is to blame.

 

[ItnStln511]

And Bob, you're so uninformed it's a joke. You praise the mormon church like it's the best thing to ever happen to this state. It's a plague. The church's number one mission is to push their religion on as many people as possible, and shun those that won't join.

Don't all religions do that to some degree?

 

[lightsleeper23]

The minimum work ethic and minimum usefulness are probably going too far, but in general the minimal skills and minimal education do apply. Let's be honest, you've got 2.2% of hourly employees who make minimum wage (and I've been one of them before), but half of them are 16-24 (kids/college students) and nearly 60% of them have no higher education. So the skills and education critiques would seem to apply. Just 1.2% of college grads actually make minimum wage. Statistically (and anecdotally as well if it means anything) most minimum wage workers are younger workers and/or those who have no education/skills/training.

There aren't a whole lot of people who are actually living on minimum wage and, it can be argued, the wage should reflect their skills and education. A worker with few or no skills and no education is not as valuable in the workplace.

True, it may be a small number of people living on minimum wage, statistically, but its still a lot. But at any rate, a boost in minimum wage would mean a boost for all lower wage jobs, which is needed in my opinion. Cost of living is skyrocketing, rents are getting crazy, and wages are stagnant. Its getting really hard out their, even if you can find a job in this economy.

 

[lightsleeper23]

Don't all religions do that to some degree?

Yes. The number one goal of all religions is to grow that religion. But some are more pushy about it. Mormons are one of the worst.

 

[A.Nonymous]

True, it may be a small number of people living on minimum wage, statistically, but its still a lot. But at any rate, a boost in minimum wage would mean a boost for all lower wage jobs, which is needed in my opinion. Cost of living is skyrocketing, rents are getting crazy, and wages are stagnant. Its getting really hard out their, even if you can find a job in this economy.

It's not a lot though, by your own admission it's not a lot. You're fixing a problem that's not really there by creating several others.

 

[lightsleeper23]

It's not a lot though, by your own admission it's not a lot. You're fixing a problem that's not really there by creating several others.

I disagree completely that its a problem that's not really there. I said the number of minimum wage workers might not be a lot STATISTICALLY, as in compared to the whole population. But it's still a huge number of people. But these are only the people right at minimum wage. I think raising that would also force a boost to all lower wage jobs, which is a much much bigger number. People working full time jobs and still struggling to get through the month is not a problem that isn't really there, its a huge problem. One that NEEDS to be addressed.

 

[Gmash]

It's not just people making right at minimum wage, but those making a little above. We're not talking about people never getting a raise ever. It also depends a lot on what part of the country you live in. Some places you might be able to squeak by on minimum wage, but in others you would struggle at double the minimum.
Anyway, the republicans always cry that the sky is falling whenever somebody mentions raising the minimum wage, just like they do when somebody mentions raising the gas mileage standards. The horror stories never happen, but they still get trotted out every single time.

 

[copestag]

much like the roads and bridges and jobs for teachers/firemen/police get trotted out everytime you want to raise taxes or prevent spending/giveaway cuts

wait thats all weve heard for the last 2 weeks........ the sky is falling

funny..... it was very sunny outside today