Sponsor Message:
Non Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Post-Election Stock Market Tanking + Layoffs  
User currently offlinePHX787 From Japan, joined Mar 2012, 7167 posts, RR: 17
Posted (1 year 8 months 2 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 3056 times:

Saw this on some independent news websites-

We all know the stock market tanked the last few says. But this is one thing I did not expect:

Apparently 45 companies have announced layoffs. Preemptive moves to avoid suffering major losses in an Obama economy.

Sources:
Boeing
http://twitchy.com/2012/11/08/layoff...usinesses-in-announcing-mass-cuts/
http://twitchy.com/2012/11/08/forwar...ness-owners-on-twitter-doing-same/
http://michellemalkin.com/2012/10/31/obamas-layoff-bomb/

You can read about it anywhere, really. Do a google search.

Obamacare will destroy small businesses AND corporations alike. The very organizations needed to hire people to get our economy back on track, they're laying off.

Thoughts?


One of the FB admins for PHX Spotters. "Zach the Expat!"
135 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineAeroWesty From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 20337 posts, RR: 62
Reply 1, posted (1 year 8 months 2 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 3057 times:

Quoting PHX787 (Thread starter):
Thoughts?

I forget where I read it, but there was some article that claimed that when the individual sections of Obamacare was read to self-identified conservatives, they overwhelmingly supported it. Only when it was identified as such did they turn against it.

Quoting PHX787 (Thread starter):
We all know the stock market tanked the last few says.

Buy on the rumor, sell on the news!! Jeez, that's an age-old adage.



International Homo of Mystery
User currently offlinejpetekyxmd80 From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 4375 posts, RR: 27
Reply 2, posted (1 year 8 months 2 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 3056 times:

Why is it that whenver the stock market takes a dive, Obama gets blamed?

Then when it rockets, he gets nothing.

I'm not saying he deserves credit for the success of the stock market, but he certainly doesn't deserve blame for it. One thing can't be disputed: he hasn't hindered the stock market, it has soared during his term.



The Best Care in the Air, 1984-2009
User currently offlinekngkyle From United States of America, joined Dec 2006, 390 posts, RR: 1
Reply 3, posted (1 year 8 months 2 weeks 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 3056 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
FORUM MODERATOR

Quoting PHX787 (Thread starter):
Obamacare will destroy small businesses AND corporations alike.

You mean that wasn't already happening before Obamacare?

I agree we need to remove the burden of healthcare costs from our employers. But I think we need to do that by passing that burden onto the government, like every other modern democracy manages to do for less money and with better results for the majority of their citizens. Those who have the money to afford better care are still free to buy additional insurance, but basic and emergency care should be a right for every citizen (without costing them their life savings or ripping off the hospital by not paying). This of course would mean a new healthcare tax of sorts, but that would just make up for not having to pay premiums to insurance companies. The net result would ideally be a reduction in costs per person, closer to the levels you see in countries that have single payer systems.

So while Obamacare is far from perfect, it does get some of the necessary steps towards single payer out of the way, like the individual mandate.

[Edited 2012-11-08 20:45:41]

User currently offlineDreadnought From United States of America, joined Feb 2008, 8785 posts, RR: 24
Reply 4, posted (1 year 8 months 2 weeks 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 3056 times:

Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 1):
I forget where I read it, but there was some article that claimed that when the individual sections of Obamacare was read to self-identified conservatives, they overwhelmingly supported it. Only when it was identified as such did they turn against it.

Nobody is saying that the whole thing is rotten. There are some good parts of it. But there are bad parts as well and when taken as a package, I think the bad outweighs the good.

Quoting kngkyle (Reply 3):
I agree we need to remove the burden of healthcare costs from our employers. But I think we need to do that by passing that burden onto the government, like every other modern democracy manages to do for less money and with better results for the majority of their citizens.

The ones where the government pays for everything tend to be far less satisfactory than others, in terms of quality of care, survival rates, wait times etc.

The best system I personally know of is Switzerland's. They have universal coverage, and it's 100% private (insurance-wise). They don't have anything like Medicare or Medicaid. The key is that their universal mandate is geared for catastrophic or big-ticket illnesses, and not the kitchen-sink coverage mandated by Obamacare.



Veni Vidi Castratavi Illegitimos
User currently offlinePHX787 From Japan, joined Mar 2012, 7167 posts, RR: 17
Reply 5, posted (1 year 8 months 2 weeks 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 3056 times:

Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 1):
I forget where I read it, but there was some article that claimed that when the individual sections of Obamacare was read to self-identified conservatives, they overwhelmingly supported it. Only when it was identified as such did they turn against it.

I will agree that parts of Obamacare are quite needed, and I'd say about 90% of Americans would support those parts, but most of Obamacare, particularly the tax and mandate, is absolutely feared by small business owners. My cousin's restaurant, for example, may have to severely cut back, because he can't afford to buy everyone insurance, and REALLY cannot afford an excess tax.



One of the FB admins for PHX Spotters. "Zach the Expat!"
User currently offlineAeroWesty From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 20337 posts, RR: 62
Reply 6, posted (1 year 8 months 2 weeks 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 3056 times:

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 4):
The key is that their universal mandate is geared for catastrophic or big-ticket illnesses, and not the kitchen-sink coverage mandated by Obamacare.

I honestly wouldn't mind an option where I paid full whack for office visits, then had catastrophic, preventative care and prescriptions at a reasonable co-pay. I'm not even sick and if I paid retail, my Rx bill would over $1,000 per month.



International Homo of Mystery
User currently offlineDreadnought From United States of America, joined Feb 2008, 8785 posts, RR: 24
Reply 7, posted (1 year 8 months 2 weeks 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 3057 times:

Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 6):
I honestly wouldn't mind an option where I paid full whack for office visits, then had catastrophic, preventative care and prescriptions at a reasonable co-pay

That's essentially the Swiss system, although you are free to upgrade to more comprehensive coverage if you want. By the way, their system places 100% of the responsibility on the individual. Employers don't have any responsibility for healthcare, although they will often negotiate preferential rates for their employees.

What I find really stupid in the American system (and Obamacare does nothing to change it) is that if I am happy with the coverage from my current insurer - I know them, they know me etc, and I change jobs, I am basically required to change to my new employer's provider.



Veni Vidi Castratavi Illegitimos
User currently offlineBMI727 From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 15707 posts, RR: 26
Reply 8, posted (1 year 8 months 2 weeks 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 3059 times:

Quoting PHX787 (Thread starter):
Apparently 45 companies have announced layoffs. Preemptive moves to avoid suffering major losses in an Obama economy.

Sequestration was no secret. It's literally written into the law, so there's nothing in the election that affected it, other than being covered up in the media by election stories and the administration not wanting contractors to send out their notices in the lead up to potential cuts. So this should surprise literally nobody, and there's not a thing Romney could have done about it if he'd won. It's a matter of a poorly written law and the fact that nobody noticed because we were all too wrapped up in the election.

Secondly, you can't blame Obama for Boeing closing facilities in California. They've kind of been on the way out for a while now, mostly due to California being the way that it is. Some of that will be moving to Oklahoma City or other places.



Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
User currently offlinekngkyle From United States of America, joined Dec 2006, 390 posts, RR: 1
Reply 9, posted (1 year 8 months 2 weeks 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 3058 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
FORUM MODERATOR

There really is a lot of agreement between Democrats and Republicans on Healthcare issues. Democrats just see the benefits of Obamacare outweighing the costs, and Republicans the opposite. Either way you look at it, it's good that we are having the discussion. I don't think either side believes that Obamacare is perfect or that changes don't need to be made. Republicans have some legitimate concerns about what Obamacare will do to small businesses, but I have faith that if certain provisions cause problems, then changes will be made to solve them. It's not like Obamacare is set in stone and can't be changed. Hell, isn't the reason it's taking so long to implement all of it so that they can discover and solve problems beforehand?

It's a shame the rhetoric gets so heated and slows the progress, but I think we're on the right track.


User currently offlinejetblueguy22 From United States of America, joined Nov 2007, 2752 posts, RR: 4
Reply 10, posted (1 year 8 months 2 weeks 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 3056 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
HEAD MODERATOR

Quoting kngkyle (Reply 9):
but I have faith that if certain provisions cause problems, then changes will be made to solve them. It's not like Obamacare is set in stone and can't be changed. Hell, isn't the reason it's taking so long to implement all of it so that they can discover and solve problems beforehand?

The problem I have is though is the mentality that we'll figure out the problems after it is passed. I was raised to not half a** something and that is what these lawmakers did. The bill should have been thoroughly reviewed before passing it. The bill is huge! We need healthcare reform, anybody who is against it because they think the system is fine is insane. But why did we have to rush this bill and not make sure it was perfect before we passed it?
Blue



You push down on that yoke, the houses get bigger, you pull back on the yoke, the houses get bigger- Ken Foltz
User currently offlinePHX787 From Japan, joined Mar 2012, 7167 posts, RR: 17
Reply 11, posted (1 year 8 months 2 weeks 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 3058 times:

***MODS- Due to computer error, I made a typo in the name of the thread. "Taking" should be "Tanking." Please excuse the error.***

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 8):
Secondly, you can't blame Obama for Boeing closing facilities in California. They've kind of been on the way out for a while now, mostly due to California being the way that it is. Some of that will be moving to Oklahoma City or other places.

Well I think everyone can agree that Cali is in the dumps, but other states' companies are having major qualms about Obamacare indeed.

Quoting jetblueguy22 (Reply 10):
The bill should have been thoroughly reviewed before passing it. The bill is huge! We need healthcare reform, anybody who is against it because they think the system is fine is insane. But why did we have to rush this bill and not make sure it was perfect before we passed it?
Blue

Exactly. It was passed without much review, and once it passed, people began to get really sensative with any sort of debate about it's repealing and replacing.



One of the FB admins for PHX Spotters. "Zach the Expat!"
User currently offlineNewark727 From United States of America, joined Dec 2009, 1332 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (1 year 8 months 2 weeks 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 3058 times:

Quoting jetblueguy22 (Reply 10):
But why did we have to rush this bill and not make sure it was perfect before we passed it?

Something about the perfect being the enemy of the good. The health care bill gets a lot of flak for lack of cost control in a bipartisan sort of manner and a lot of flak from the left for losing the public option which was one way of potentially accomplishing that (would it have? can't really say right now.) Meanwhile as it was gathering steam it started gaining a ton of unequivocal opposition from the nascent tea party tailored for media coverage and it must have seemed like the longer Congress waited, the worse the result would be- the 2010 elections say that might have been a good call.

I seem to have blocked most of the debate about it from my memory but I think President Obama went up a blind alley in trying to pay for it with a "Cadillac plan" tax as that makes it seem like less of a nation-wide responsibility and also seems a bit counterproductive in its focus as it raises money for providing care by making the care that everyone would realistically want access to cost more. There was an editorial talking about how health care isn't like buying a car. The choice is between treating your condition, or not- no in-between "used car" in that situation. (This is also why I'm suspicious of market-centric counter-proposals, though.)

I think one big problem with our health care system is that employers are involved at all, it seems to have evolved from a particular set of circumstances (widespread and steady employment) that has been becoming more obsolete for a while, and when times get rough it may concentrate risk (you don't want to lose your job and your healthcare at the same time, I don't think it happens as often as it used to but still) and raise labor costs. I'm not completely sure how best to reduce their exposure and transfer it to some other organization without going the full single-payer route though, and while I'm perfectly cool with that, I know a heck of a lot of people aren't and I'm willing to accept that if the alternatives can produce a better system. (Personally, I don't understand the argument that the top-shelf high-dollar clinics wouldn't happen anymore, but the anecdotes about time to receive care seem to be somewhat well supported?)


User currently offlineQFA380 From Australia, joined exactly 9 years ago today! , 2060 posts, RR: 1
Reply 13, posted (1 year 8 months 2 weeks 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 3060 times:

Quoting jpetekyxmd80 (Reply 2):
Why is it that whenver the stock market takes a dive, Obama gets blamed?

Why is it whenever unemployment goes up, Bush gets blamed? Take responsibility for the good, but its someone else's problem when things don't go to plan.


User currently offlinePlanesNTrains From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 5445 posts, RR: 29
Reply 14, posted (1 year 8 months 2 weeks 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 3058 times:

The bad news: Hours will be cut to avoid paying for employees insurance.
The good news: More people will have jobs to make up for the reduced hours of others.
The bad news: No one will make enough to live on, so dependence on govt support will continue.
The good news: The more people need the govt, the more power govt has.

I'm not sure if politicians realize the impact that the healthcare act will have on small businesses. Those business owners are smart people who personally invested their lives to build something. They will figure out a way to mitigate the healthcare plan, but unfortunately it will come out of the hide of the employees - that's just how it's set up. That, or they may fail.

There's a lot of talk about the 1%, and I think Harry Reid puts small business in the 3% group. By making the business community somewhat of the bad guy or lucky guy or whatever ("you didn't build that"), I believe we have created a self-fulfilling anti-business mindset amongst many people. How that can be a good thing is beyond me, but that's how it seems to be going from my perspective.

Pay an extra $500/month for healthcare for low/lower wage employees with limited skills? Those days will end for a great many people, and they are precisely the ones that need to be working as much as possible to support their families. I think we will have a lot of really healthy but desperately poor people, and an even larger percentage paying no net federal income taxes (or getting thousands of dollars more back then they ever paid in).

So then we have more pressure on business to pay more in taxes, the rest of the wage earners will pay more in taxes, the government teet grows ever more voluminous, and the cycle continues.

I think Obama inherited a horrible situation. I think both the Dems and the Republicans have put us here. I think Obamas economic policies are doing little to actually fix the problem - that we've seen growth is to be expected. I don't know exactly how to fix it all, but demonizing the rich and burdening small business makes for a successful election but IMHO opinion does little to actually fix what's broken. That includes ramming through a health care bill in a manner that would serve as a great example for pushing through tax reform and budget cuts, but oh we'll......

-Dave



Totes my goats!
User currently offlineAesma From France, joined Nov 2009, 6511 posts, RR: 9
Reply 15, posted (1 year 8 months 2 weeks 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 3059 times:

Here many companies announced layoffs after the elections because they didn't want the news to influence the outcome (since a supposedly business friendly president was seeking reelection). It has nothing to do with who actually won.


New Technology is the name we give to stuff that doesn't work yet. Douglas Adams
User currently offlineiFlyLOTs From United States of America, joined Apr 2012, 449 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (1 year 8 months 2 weeks 17 hours ago) and read 3057 times:

Please don't flame me if I am completely wrong but I thought that;

1) The Boeing cuts had to do with the fact that they were re-structuring their defense arm and not so much the Obama economy, and the majority of them were in the administrative part of the defense arm (although I guess this could be attributed to Obama wanting to cut military spending)
2) The fiscal cliff being a much more looming problem than the implementation of Obamacare. An non-partisan group said that if the fiscal cliff happened that we would end up in a recession anyway, no matter what happened in the election.

I could very well be wrong.. But that was more the feel I was getting when I saw that the stock market wasn't doing so hot.



"...stay hungry, stay foolish" -Steve Jobs
User currently offlineAirframeAS From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 14150 posts, RR: 24
Reply 17, posted (1 year 8 months 2 weeks 17 hours ago) and read 3060 times:

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 5):
most of Obamacare, particularly the tax and mandate, is absolutely feared by small business owners.

This is the main reason why I am against Obamacare. It's also most feared by individuals, especially to those who work part time and go to school. This is a part of the package that really needs to be thrown out. We are not ready for such a mandate. A jobs package needs to come first before mandating health care. If there are no jobs, then how will this be paid for?!



A Safe Flight Begins With Quality Maintenance On The Ground.
User currently offlinePlanesNTrains From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 5445 posts, RR: 29
Reply 18, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 3056 times:

If you have 4 employees working about 35 hours a week, it is very possible that you will look to hire a new employee and reduce the existing employees hours. Personally, I will gauge it based partly on performance and life circumstance, but I can guarantee that every business needs to find a way to mitigate the increased financial burden, and one of those ways is to reduce hours.

I believe the city of Seattle also now has a law mandating paid personal days off for employees at companies employing at least five full time individuals within the city. Again, regardless of the benefits or merits of such a law, the downside is that employers will be encouraged to reduce hours to both avoid the law or to mitigate it by having extra staff available to fill in for the employees missing work. So once more, there might be more people employed but all employees will likely be working less as those hours need to be spread around a larger pool of staff.

These are all challenges for small businesses. The difference between a small business and the government that mandates these things is that the small business cannot just continue losing money - they will either figure out a way to mitigate the new costs or they will fold.

-Dave



Totes my goats!
User currently offlinepu From Sweden, joined Dec 2011, 695 posts, RR: 13
Reply 19, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 3058 times:

Some of the layoffs were just a protest that $400 million sent to Karl Rove and a couple billion spent elsewhere were unfairly NOT able to buy the election.

http://www.foxbusiness.com/investing...ts-gdp-outperform-under-democrats/

Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 1):

Only when it was identified as such did they turn against it

Most of the Republicans I have seen posting on this board, and on Capitol Hill, are entirely concerned with WHO makes a policy proposal versus the predicted results of the policy by non-partisan sources. The placebo effect applies in politics as well: Obama ideas will always fail, regardless of provable evidence to the contrary.

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 4):
The best system I personally know of is Switzerland's

For the purposes of comparison to the USA, there are essentially NO poor people in Switzerland. No immigrants. No high school dropouts. No habitual criminals. ( For comparison purposes, only. )

America's huge immigrant population, its wildly sporadic local educational system, its world-leading crime-punishment regime etc.... mean that what works in Switzerland, Sweden, Japan and other heterogeneous societies CANNOT work in America.



Pu


User currently offlineMir From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 21482 posts, RR: 56
Reply 20, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 3059 times:

Quoting AirframeAS (Reply 17):
This is a part of the package that really needs to be thrown out. We are not ready for such a mandate.

The mandate is how the whole thing is paid for. So it's not a good idea to take it out.

-Mir



7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
User currently offlinebjorn14 From Norway, joined Feb 2010, 3381 posts, RR: 2
Reply 21, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 3058 times:

Quoting pu (Reply 19):
America's huge immigrant population, its wildly sporadic local educational system, its world-leading crime-punishment regime etc.... mean that what works in Switzerland, Sweden, Japan and other heterogeneous societies CANNOT work in America.

  

Also when they passed Medicare in 1965 they said it would cost $80 B in 10 years, it ended up costing $365 B for those 10 years and still counting. If you think America will do a great job with health care, I have 2 words for you "VA Hospitals" They can't even take care of sick servicemen & women let alone your Grandma.

My big fear is the the Medical Device Tax (that helps pay for Obamacare ) will stymie research in that area and cost us innovations that could have saved lives but then again dead people don't need medical care.

Also see:

www.dailyjobcuts.com

Employers were waiting to see if there would be a change and when there wasn't they saw more of the same and they started wielding the axe.

[Edited 2012-11-11 17:45:40]

Actually, America will see an astounding growth in small businesses as they try to get to the 49-employee level and 29-hour work week.


[Edited 2012-11-11 17:48:37]

[Edited 2012-11-11 17:49:53]


"I want to know the voice of God the rest is just details" --A. Einstein
User currently offlinePHX787 From Japan, joined Mar 2012, 7167 posts, RR: 17
Reply 22, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 3058 times:

Quoting pu (Reply 19):
America's huge immigrant population, its wildly sporadic local educational system, its world-leading crime-punishment regime etc.... mean that what works in Switzerland, Sweden, Japan and other heterogeneous societies CANNOT work in America.

I think you mean "homogeneous" when talking about those societies, but you're 100% right.

We right wingers, and especially a lot of us here in the American southwest really have a lot of fear when people wish America was more like europe. We simply cannot be europe! And especially now with Europe in massive debt, we don't want that kind of government, and a lot of employers are saying that may come from a second term Obama regime.

Even with or without Mr. Obama in office, we still have the stagnation of government, with Dems in senate and Reps in house. Depending on who makes the best case to the American people, we will see a shift in congressional control in 2014...hopefully, back to the right, because so far, the left's ideas have lead us to more unemployment.



One of the FB admins for PHX Spotters. "Zach the Expat!"
User currently offlinecasinterest From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 4458 posts, RR: 2
Reply 23, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 3058 times:

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 22):
because so far, the left's ideas have lead us to more unemployment.

I think you are reading your graphs upside down again.

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 22):
We right wingers, and especially a lot of us here in the American southwest really have a lot of fear when

You could stop your sentence right here. This is all the Right has going for it. Fear and blame. For all it's talk about the liberals, the most destructive policies and action have occurred under the GOP.



Older than I just was ,and younger than I will soo be.
User currently offlineMir From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 21482 posts, RR: 56
Reply 24, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 3058 times:

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 22):
Even with or without Mr. Obama in office, we still have the stagnation of government, with Dems in senate and Reps in house.

You make it sound like having split control of Congress is a bad thing. It shouldn't be - if the two parties could actually try to help out the country rather than deciding that their primary objective should be to try and evict the current resident of the White House, then perhaps we could get some action going. And hopefully the beating the GOP took in the election will help them see that the people aren't buying what they've been selling, and get them to change their ways.

-Mir



7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
User currently offlineKen777 From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 8177 posts, RR: 8
Reply 25, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 3120 times:

Quoting PHX787 (Thread starter):
Obamacare will destroy small businesses AND corporations alike.

No it won't, If some small business owners don't want to keep going then there will be others who will step in, perform the work and hire the people.

Companies like Boeing have long laid off employees - especially those in the unions. They were doing well in Kansas & Oklahoma until they spun off the work to a new company called Spirit. Queer that. If Spirit can make a profit why couldn't Boeing

Quoting PHX787 (Thread starter):
The very organizations needed to hire people to get our economy back on track, they're laying off.

Some defense related companies that expected a boom if Romney won have decided to trip with the Obama win.

Those companies know where their programs sit in terms of budget priorities and are going to react accordingly.


Quoting jpetekyxmd80 (Reply 2):
Why is it that whenver the stock market takes a dive, Obama gets blamed?

Right now I expect some sell offs in order to enjoy the current capital gains levels. I doubt very seriously that the GOP will work with the Democrats so the lower capital gains rate will die December 31st.

Considering the political differences right now I see all the tax cuts ending at the end of the year and a new start on Obama Tax Cuts developing for a rapid approval. That puts the House hard right in last place in terms of getting the job done. Boehner will have to depend on the House Democrats and some realistic Republicans to get the job done. That might cost him his job (Cantor is obviously waiting for that) but it will resolve a lot of issues.

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 4):
Nobody is saying that the whole thing is rotten. There are some good parts of it. But there are bad parts as well and when taken as a package, I think the bad outweighs the good.

If someone in your family had a pre-existing condition your thinking would be the reverse.

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 4):
The ones where the government pays for everything tend to be far less satisfactory than others, in terms of quality of care, survival rates, wait times etc.

The only one where I have had actual experience with is Australia. That is one of those where the government "pays everything" - almost. But the taxpayers fund that Medicare program so basically they are the ones paying everything. They do have private insurance available at a fraction (about 20%) of the costs in the US, simply because everyone without private insurance is covered.

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 4):
The best system I personally know of is Switzerland's. They have universal coverage, and it's 100% private (insurance-wise). They don't have anything like Medicare or Medicaid. The key is that their universal mandate is geared for catastrophic or big-ticket illnesses, and not the kitchen-sink coverage mandated by Obamacare

There were a lot of compromises with ObamaCare and one major reason was to keep the insurance companies on board. It is obviously less effective to add in the costs of private companies, but it was realistic.

One of the issues that has exploded our costs are the people without insurance who have to go to the ER for something that could have been addresses earlier for far less money. When we start seeing money invested in community/neighborhood clinics then you can start seeing significant reductions in costs. Both private and public.

Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 6):
I honestly wouldn't mind an option where I paid full whack for office visits, then had catastrophic, preventative care and prescriptions at a reasonable co-pay. I'm not even sick and if I paid retail, my Rx bill would over $1,000 per month.

My Rx bill wasn't that much before we got hit with 2 cancers each, but our health insurance was $1,000 after the first 4 years of W. Doubled in those 4 years. It really shows that you cannot trust either medical costs or insurance costs to be with the average middle class financial abilities. $1K a month is a pain, but better than the $1,500 a week for one single drug while my wife had a port.

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 7):
What I find really stupid in the American system (and Obamacare does nothing to change it) is that if I am happy with the coverage from my current insurer - I know them, they know me etc, and I change jobs, I am basically required to change to my new employer's provider

Which is a good argument to get nanny care off the backs of all employers. Move selection to the individual, even going with a government program if that is best for them. Pick a program that is best for you as an individual, or a family.

As long as we continue keeping the financial burden of nanny care on employer's backs you can look for a deterioration of that benefit. Higher co-pays, more limitations of coverage. Anything to keep costs down. Employer nanny care is an albatross and can't last forever - just as the tax free ride of employer nanny care cannot last forever.


User currently offlineAirframeAS From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 14150 posts, RR: 24
Reply 26, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 3101 times:

Quoting Mir (Reply 20):
The mandate is how the whole thing is paid for.

How exactly is it being paid for if an individual doesn't have employment with the mandate?

Jobs need to come first and foremost. Same logic applies to buying a house or a car. Gotta have a job to pay for it.



A Safe Flight Begins With Quality Maintenance On The Ground.
User currently offlineflood From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 1381 posts, RR: 1
Reply 27, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 3133 times:

Quoting PHX787 (Thread starter):
We all know the stock market tanked the last few says

We also know the new reports from Europe on their bleak economic outlook didn't help.

Quoting PHX787 (Thread starter):
Saw this on some independent news websites

So why didn't you link to any?

Instead, you linked to the blog of a Fox contributor, author of "Unhinged: Exposing Liberals Gone Wild" and other ramblings. She also happens to be owner and CEO of that other site you linked to, namely Twitchy - which isn't a news website either.

Quoting PHX787 (Thread starter):
Apparently 45 companies have announced layoffs. Preemptive moves to avoid suffering major losses in an Obama economy.

Have you looked at any of those reports?

Blackberry (RIM) has been in the crapper for years. In fact, their stock came crashing down in 2008. I guess that makes their demise Bush's fault  

The Pepsi article is from January.

Groupon laid off 80 sales employees this week, "reflecting ongoing efforts to automate some sales functions". Machines replacing humans, haha... what a silly concept.

US Cellular layoffs - due to Sprint "reaching a deal to buy U.S. Cellular markets in the Midwest which include the Fort Wayne area for $480 million to boost its network capacity as it upgrades its network.". That said, guess who's hiring?

Another right-wing list making the rounds even managed to include Gameforge Berlin amongst those companies. Goodness, a German company laying off 20 employees... in Germany. The tentacles of Obamacare know no bounds!

Some other scary headlines from the past few days:

52% of KY manufacturers say they plan to hire in 2013
WMX Group Plans to Hire Over 1,000 Wealth Advisors in the Next 12 Months
GoHealth plans to hire an additional 150 employees by spring
Herbalife considers Winston-Salem site for plant with nearly 500 jobs
Whirpool Manufacturing Plant To Hire 150 Workers
The Chouest La Ship facility plans to hire 250 to 500 skilled employees in the next six to eight months.
Company plans to hire 266 workers in Middlebury
Qualtrics Pledges To Hire 1,100 in Utah
StarTek plans to hire 80 customer service representatives by year’s end
CMG Financial to open lending office in FL, hire as many as 70
Twin River to hold job fair next week - promising 350 new jobs
New Las Vegas call center to hire 100 workers; job fair set for Friday
Caesars plans to invest $25 million more in Baltimore casino - hire 500 more people than originally planned

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 22):
We right wingers, and especially a lot of us here in the American southwest really have a lot of fear when people wish America was more like europe.

No, right-wingers have a lot of fear, period - and they do a darn good job of spreading it. And hey, if there's nothing to be fearful of - just make shit up.

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 22):
We simply cannot be europe!

I know! Especially Greece. Greece! I keep hearing about Greece! *thunder*


User currently offlinePlanesNTrains From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 5445 posts, RR: 29
Reply 28, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 3130 times:

Quoting Ken777 (Reply 25):
No it won't, If some small business owners don't want to keep going then there will be others who will step in, perform the work and hire the people.

Companies like Boeing have long laid off employees - especially those in the unions. They were doing well in Kansas & Oklahoma until they spun off the work to a new company called Spirit. Queer that. If Spirit can make a profit why couldn't Boeing

You make it sound like magic. When you add costs to doing business, that changes the financial equation for that business. If that happens, the business may be able to eat the costs or raise their prices/rates. If not, they can either go under or reduce employee hours. In this economy, it is very difficult with the increase in costs in so many areas - food, energy, taxes, etc. - to keep just raising rates/prices. At some point, instead of doing that, you mitigate it on the employee end. Read: Reduced hours.

So in many, though certainly not all, cases you will see the people who aren't making a huge income trade off income for insurance. They might lose 5-10 hours/week at work but get health coverage. If you are healthy but hungry, you might very well prefer to keep the hours and skip the insurance, especially if you're younger. Regardless, this will affect people's income substantially, regardless of how simple some people want to make it sound. "Oh, you can't make money any more? Well too bad. Just close up, lose everything you've worked for, and someone else will just pop up and make it happen." In my opinion, that is largely a fallacy. After the last four years, businesses have cut about as much fat as they can. There just isn't a whole lot of opportunity to eat the costs and keep making decent money for many companies, and no superstar is going to be able to come in and magically make it happen instead. If it were that easy, they'd be doing it already.

Anyhow...

-Dave



Totes my goats!
User currently offlinebjorn14 From Norway, joined Feb 2010, 3381 posts, RR: 2
Reply 29, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 3122 times:

Quoting PlanesNTrains (Reply 28):
You make it sound like magic.

That's the problem with most Liberals is they think money grows on trees or its OPM (Other People's Money)



"I want to know the voice of God the rest is just details" --A. Einstein
User currently offlinecasinterest From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 4458 posts, RR: 2
Reply 30, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 3110 times:

Quoting bjorn14 (Reply 29):
That's the problem with most Liberals is they think money grows on trees or its OPM (Other People's Money)

I find that laughable since the GOP with it's wars and tax cuts got us into the deficit we are in now. FYI, the 2012 deficit of 1.1 trillion is 100 billion less than what Bush left Obama with in 2009.



Older than I just was ,and younger than I will soo be.
User currently offlinePHX787 From Japan, joined Mar 2012, 7167 posts, RR: 17
Reply 31, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 3111 times:

Quoting Mir (Reply 24):
You make it sound like having split control of Congress is a bad thing. It shouldn't be

Well it's created stagnation. Both sides of congress haven't done crap in the last 2 years and it's mostly because of the media scaring the liberals into not doing anything.

Quoting casinterest (Reply 23):
You could stop your sentence right here. This is all the Right has going for it. Fear and blame. For all it's talk about the liberals, the most destructive policies and action have occurred under the GOP.

Read above: Liberals using scare tactics, such as throwing the granny off the cliff, and of course "Surrender your rights" etc etc   

Quoting casinterest (Reply 23):
I think you are reading your graphs upside down again.

Did you not see the topic of this thread?

Quoting flood (Reply 27):
So why didn't you link to any?

Did you not see my links?

Quoting flood (Reply 27):
No, right-wingers have a lot of fear, period - and they do a darn good job of spreading it. And hey, if there's nothing to be fearful of - just make shit up.

see above   

Quoting bjorn14 (Reply 29):
That's the problem with most Liberals is they think money grows on trees or its OPM (Other People's Money)

  



One of the FB admins for PHX Spotters. "Zach the Expat!"
User currently offlineNewark727 From United States of America, joined Dec 2009, 1332 posts, RR: 0
Reply 32, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 3106 times:

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 31):
Read above: Liberals using scare tactics, such as throwing the granny off the cliff, and of course "Surrender your rights" etc etc

Hold on just a second. The GOP is just as happy to exploit benefit programs for the elderly as the Democrats are- just look at the Tea Party saying "Don't touch my Medicare" or the demographics of Mitt Romney's voters. Feel free to decry Congress- it's been the national pastime for over 200 years. But don't twist the truth to do it. And when it comes to "surrender your rights" I just have no idea what you're talking about, maybe a little context would help.


User currently offlinecws818 From United States of America, joined Aug 2008, 1176 posts, RR: 2
Reply 33, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 3108 times:

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 22):
We right wingers, and especially a lot of us here in the American southwest really have a lot of fear when people wish America was more like europe.

That is irrational, because, as you say:

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 22):
We simply cannot be europe!

We won't be Europe. Who has convinced you otherwise?



volgende halte...Station Hollands Spoor
User currently offlineflood From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 1381 posts, RR: 1
Reply 34, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 3109 times:

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 31):
Did you not see my links?

Did you even bother to read my reply?

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 31):
see above

Indeed.


User currently offlineDocLightning From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 19361 posts, RR: 58
Reply 35, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 3115 times:

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 31):
Did you not see the topic of this thread?

Show me jobs loss at any point in the last 36 months. I don't mean people getting laid off, I mean jobs numbers.

People get laid off all the time, even in the golden days of the 1990's.

In the last three years, there has been continuous jobs growth. Not fantastic, but not shrinkage.

If you're going to claim to be a "Conservative," at least get your facts straight.


User currently offlineflipdewaf From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2006, 1562 posts, RR: 1
Reply 36, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 4 days ago) and read 3104 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 31):
Did you not see the topic of this thread?

It probably should have read"Angry right winger tries to apportion blame as he struggles to come to terms with the choice of his nation"

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 31):
Did you not see my links?

Maybe the links should have been "Angry right winger trying to apportion blame cites other angry right wingers trying to apportion blame as proof that blame accusations have merit".
I think someone mentioned something the other day about a republican echo chamber, does it make you feel good about yourself regugitating facts that haven't been substantiated?

Unless you can show statistically significant evedence that the democrats being in power have caused a drop in either employment or GDP then I'm afraid that you are just the next link in the chain fear spreading by the republicans.

No doubt you will not take any notice of what others have to say if they do not agree, thats not how the "echo chamber" works.

Fred


User currently offlineSmittyOne From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 37, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 3102 times:

Quoting bjorn14 (Reply 29):
That's the problem with most Liberals is they think money grows on trees or its OPM (Other People's Money)

If you genuinely believed the things you've posted on here about Jesus, why would you even care about money? Wouldn't you be happy to give as much of it as possible away? Shouldn't we all be?

It seems that you are defining "Liberal" as a person who actually wants to act on what an awful lot of "Conservatives" profess to believe in. That's ironic.

[Edited 2012-11-13 03:17:07]

User currently offlinebjorn14 From Norway, joined Feb 2010, 3381 posts, RR: 2
Reply 38, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 3 days 22 hours ago) and read 3103 times:

Quoting SmittyOne (Reply 37):
SmittyOne

The difference is that I decide who to give my money to. Liberals want to decide for me who my money should go to. And trust me I give plenty of it away. I live by an old Native American proverb "Your wealth is not determined by how much you have but by how much you give away"

G-d has blessed me and I want to bless others.

[Edited 2012-11-13 03:56:59]


"I want to know the voice of God the rest is just details" --A. Einstein
User currently offlinealoges From Germany, joined Jan 2006, 8680 posts, RR: 43
Reply 39, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 3 days 22 hours ago) and read 3101 times:

Quoting bjorn14 (Reply 38):
G-d has blessed me and I want to bless others.

So you want to become other people's God by blessing them. Interesting.



Walk together, talk together all ye peoples of the earth. Then, and only then, shall ye have peace.
User currently offlineMir From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 21482 posts, RR: 56
Reply 40, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 3100 times:

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 31):
Read above: Liberals using scare tactics, such as throwing the granny off the cliff

Death panels. That is all.

-Mir



7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
User currently offlinebjorn14 From Norway, joined Feb 2010, 3381 posts, RR: 2
Reply 41, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 3106 times:

Quoting aloges (Reply 39):
So you want to become other people's God by blessing them. Interesting.

Not at all, I try to give money as anonymously as possible.



"I want to know the voice of God the rest is just details" --A. Einstein
User currently offlinealoges From Germany, joined Jan 2006, 8680 posts, RR: 43
Reply 42, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 3105 times:

Quoting bjorn14 (Reply 41):
Not at all, I try to give money as anonymously as possible.

A blessing is an act of God, just as you said:

Quoting bjorn14 (Reply 38):
G-d has blessed

and the most you can do is wish His blessings onto someone else. Hence, this:

Quoting bjorn14 (Reply 38):
I want to bless others.

shows quite clearly that you view your charitable donations as equal to God's work.



Walk together, talk together all ye peoples of the earth. Then, and only then, shall ye have peace.
User currently offlineflipdewaf From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2006, 1562 posts, RR: 1
Reply 43, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 3101 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting bjorn14 (Reply 41):
I try to give money as anonymously as possible.

But broadcast it to the world on the internet?

Quoting bjorn14 (Reply 38):
And trust me I give plenty of it away

Nice!


User currently offlinecasinterest From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 4458 posts, RR: 2
Reply 44, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 3098 times:

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 31):
Did you not see the topic of this thread?
Quoting PHX787 (Reply 31):
Read above: Liberals using scare tactics, such as throwing the granny off the cliff, and of course "Surrender your rights" etc etc

Both parties do it, but in the case of the GOP and it's Fake News network, more scare and featr and misinformation get spread to the masses. Especially due to the GIOP and Fake News Network mistrust of the MSM and it;s adherence to facts,statistics, and polls. These are things the GOP can't stand, when heresay, faith, and Honest godly men are speaking.

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 31):
Did you not see the topic of this thread?

The stock market has not tanked. Especially when comparing other events in the history of the dow, and layoffs are natural for any company. Some will layoff, some will hire, at every day of the year. The jobless rate is what is of concern. For the last 30-36 months that trend has been to show an bettering economy.



Older than I just was ,and younger than I will soo be.
User currently offlineSmittyOne From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 45, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 3105 times:

Quoting bjorn14 (Reply 38):
The difference is that I decide who to give my money to. Liberals want to decide for me who my money should go to. And trust me I give plenty of it away. I live by an old Native American proverb "Your wealth is not determined by how much you have but by how much you give away"

G-d has blessed me and I want to bless others.

I'm not looking to jab you about what you do with your money - if you give a lot of it away, then good for you. If you don't, then good for you.

My point was that a lot of the Socially Conservative folks - largely Christian - seem also to be Fiscally Conservative and therefore extremely agitated by any notion of redistribution of wealth by the Government. Far and above a healthy concern for the proper operation of a market economy (which is what bothers ME about it), they seem personally offended that the Government might decide what to do with "their money"...more specifically that the Government might use it for purposes of which they do not approve. Which I find supremely ironic when you consider that their role model Jesus Christ would never have been caught accumulating wealth in the first place, and directed his followers to live their lives in disregard for earthly treasure and all the baggage that comes with it. Giving money to 'worthy' causes is beside the point.

Conservatives cannot both claim to truly believe what Jesus said about the nature and future of this world and also worry where their money goes. The concepts are not compatible. Likewise, they can't insist that the rest of us follow Jesus' teachings on social issues like abortion or gay marriage while they re-rack their investment portfolios and bitch about welfare handouts. If it were merely private hypocrisy I wouldn't even bother with this post, but I fear that it is far worse than that - the political impasse created by these people may make it impossible for leadership of both parties to come together to find practical solutions to the real problems facing the country in 2012.


User currently offlinebjorn14 From Norway, joined Feb 2010, 3381 posts, RR: 2
Reply 46, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 3098 times:

Quoting aloges (Reply 42):
aloges
Quoting aloges (Reply 42):
flipdewaf

OTOH, if I didn't help ppl you would then call me a hypocrite because of my faith/values. You can't have it both ways.

"Woe to those who call good evil and evil good" Isaiah 5:20



"I want to know the voice of God the rest is just details" --A. Einstein
User currently offlinealoges From Germany, joined Jan 2006, 8680 posts, RR: 43
Reply 47, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 3094 times:

Quoting bjorn14 (Reply 46):
OTOH, if I didn't help ppl you would then call me a hypocrite because of my faith/values.

I use that word very sparingly and have no recollection of discussing your faith with you (brief exchanges do not count). So no, I would most certainly not call you a hypocrite unless you gave me a reason for it.

My problem is this: you seem to believe that charity is a basis for a stable society. However, charitable donations depend entirely on the donors' ability and desire to give. So as soon as either diminishes, some of those who have had to rely on donations will go away empty-handed. Desperation and uncertainty are prime causes for social unrest, which means that a system that's based on unreliable charity is not a functional social security system. I realise that donating money gives people a much nicer feeling than paying taxes or other mandatory contributions, but that cannot be the deciding factor when it comes to designing a social security system.



Walk together, talk together all ye peoples of the earth. Then, and only then, shall ye have peace.
User currently offlineKen777 From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 8177 posts, RR: 8
Reply 48, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 3090 times:

Quoting bjorn14 (Reply 21):
Also when they passed Medicare in 1965 they said it would cost $80 B in 10 years, it ended up costing $365 B for those 10 years and still counting.
Quoting bjorn14 (Reply 21):
My big fear is the the Medical Device Tax (that helps pay for Obamacare ) will stymie research in that area and cost us innovations that could have saved lives but then again dead people don't need medical care.
Quoting PlanesNTrains (Reply 28):
You make it sound like magic.

Actually I was thinking competition. We had a grocery store near us shut down a few months ago - they simply couldn't compete. This was long before the election so there was no political factor. Now there is an empty store and I would expect someone to be moving in sometime in the future. Or WalMart buying the property and building a Neighborhood Store.

The reality is there is an empty store that should be able to bring in customers if they are competitive. BTW, it is in a pretty good neighborhood as far as demographics go.

Quoting bjorn14 (Reply 29):
That's the problem with most Liberals is they think money grows on trees or its OPM (Other People's Money)

As opposed to Bain's approach?


User currently offlinePHX787 From Japan, joined Mar 2012, 7167 posts, RR: 17
Reply 49, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 3096 times:

Quoting cws818 (Reply 33):
We won't be Europe. Who has convinced you otherwise?

Well, liberals trying to convince me that socialism is actually good

Quoting Mir (Reply 40):
Death panels. That is all.

Which actually exist, or will exist under obamacare
http://www.wnd.com/2012/10/obama-adviser-admits-we-need-death-panels/
It's not good to ration healthcare. If my leg is broken, I don't want them to wrap it and not give me crutches.



One of the FB admins for PHX Spotters. "Zach the Expat!"
User currently offlineDeltaMD90 From United States of America, joined Apr 2008, 7788 posts, RR: 52
Reply 50, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 3094 times:

Quoting SmittyOne (Reply 45):
Quoting aloges (Reply 47):

I think a lot of frustration results in seeing one's money getting WASTED. No one can argue there is waste. Also, many people want to help the poor in certain ways, not give money for people to stay on welfare and abuse the system.

Now I don't fully agree, I think a lot of good can indeed be done with public spending, but I see the plight of many Christians deemed "hypocritical." I do think some of it is warranted, but I also do sympathize with them as well. Often, one's heart can be in the right place but their brain is not (and I say that very cautiously because that definitely goes both ways)


Now, me and Mr bjorn14 definitely have our differences in opinion, but I do think he has valid points to a certain extent on this issue



Ironically I have never flown a Delta MD-90 :)
User currently offlinetugger From United States of America, joined Apr 2006, 5411 posts, RR: 8
Reply 51, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 3096 times:

Quoting Ken777 (Reply 48):
As opposed to Bain's approach?

You mean just shaking the tree?  
You can both shake the tree and yes money does grow on trees. Just ask apple farmers (and many others).
The whole thing is the tree just needs to be cared for. You need to keep the ground it is growing in watered and fertilized and healthy, and when you collect the harvest you need to do so properly, carefully and not too often or too much. And then you need to return seeds to the grounds for new growth and allow for the original tree to regrow its wealth. Ultimately the tree itself, where you get your "money" needs to sustain and grow.

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 49):
Well, liberals trying to convince me that socialism is actually good

Do you think that a limited level of "socialism" i.e. programs that provide a floor to prevent damage to the community (unemployment is one example), is OK? If so to what level?

Tugg



I don’t know that I am unafraid to be myself, but it is hard to be somebody else. -W. Shatner
User currently offlinePHX787 From Japan, joined Mar 2012, 7167 posts, RR: 17
Reply 52, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 3088 times:

Quoting tugger (Reply 51):
Do you think that a limited level of "socialism" i.e. programs that provide a floor to prevent damage to the community (unemployment is one example), is OK? If so to what level?

And how does this relate to my argument of total socialism? I understand some things are ok and actually necessary, but should not be abused to the point where people actually live off of this crap.



One of the FB admins for PHX Spotters. "Zach the Expat!"
User currently offlinelewis From Greece, joined Jul 1999, 3621 posts, RR: 5
Reply 53, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 3084 times:

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 52):
And how does this relate to my argument of total socialism?

In Europe, even the most socialist of the countries do not work under total socialism.

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 52):
but should not be abused to the point where people actually live off of this crap.

Correct, though abuse will be present even if the country is not very socialist. You can either say that in order to fight abuse you cancel all social programs whatsoever or you can place controls to minimize abuse - which would not be non-socialist, just common sense.


User currently offlinecws818 From United States of America, joined Aug 2008, 1176 posts, RR: 2
Reply 54, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 3084 times:

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 49):
It's not good to ration healthcare. If my leg is broken, I don't want them to wrap it and not give me crutches.

Go buy some crutches on the free market.

After all, you are the one crusading against "socialism" - put your money where your mouth is.



volgende halte...Station Hollands Spoor
User currently offlinetugger From United States of America, joined Apr 2006, 5411 posts, RR: 8
Reply 55, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 3 days 5 hours ago) and read 3084 times:

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 52):
And how does this relate to my argument of total socialism? I understand some things are ok and actually necessary, but should not be abused to the point where people actually live off of this crap.

Sorry, didn't see any argument against "total socialism" (which I have to ask: What the heck is "total" socialism?), you had only said:

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 49):
Well, liberals trying to convince me that socialism is actually good

which gives no real information on what level/type of socialism you are talking about.

So that is why I was just asking to what level you find "socialism" (however you define it) to be acceptable or supportable (though I would assume assume that you find the level of socialism in Japan to be acceptable as you have shown an affection for and desire to be in the country).

Tugg



I don’t know that I am unafraid to be myself, but it is hard to be somebody else. -W. Shatner
User currently offlinePHX787 From Japan, joined Mar 2012, 7167 posts, RR: 17
Reply 56, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 3086 times:

Quoting tugger (Reply 55):
Quoting PHX787 (Reply 49):
Well, liberals trying to convince me that socialism is actually good

which gives no real information on what level/type of socialism you are talking about.

Any amount of "socialism" needs to be monitored so it doesn't go haywire.



One of the FB admins for PHX Spotters. "Zach the Expat!"
User currently offlineGeezer From United States of America, joined Aug 2010, 1479 posts, RR: 2
Reply 57, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 3095 times:

Quoting PHX787 (Thread starter):
Obamacare will destroy small businesses AND corporations alike. The very organizations needed to hire people to get our economy back on track, they're laying off.

Thoughts?

After only reading the first 4 or 5 posts, (more important things to do today), it's funny you should mention that ! I ran across this earlier today................


Last week, the non-profit political action group FreedomWorks listed nearly a dozen top United States companies that plan to start laying off hundreds of employees with the implementation of Obamacare.

Those firms include:
• Welch Allyn — a manufacturer of medical diagnostic equipment in central New York — which says it will cut 275 employees, about 10 percent of its workforce, over the next three years.
• Dana Holding Corp. — a global auto parts manufacturing company — which warned of layoffs due to "$24 million over the next six years in additional U.S. healthcare expenses.’’
• Stryker — a medical device manufacturer — which plans to close its facility in Orchard Park, N.Y., eliminating 96 jobs in December. They also say they’ll slash 5 percent of their global workforce, about 1,170 positions.
• Boston Scientific — a medical device manufacturer — said it plans to cut between 1,200 and 1,400 jobs, while shifting investments and workers overseas to China.
• Medtronic — a medical device maker — which cut 500 positions over the summer, with 500 more set to be eliminated by the end of 2013.
• Other companies promising job cuts include: Smith & Nephew — 770 layoffs; Abbott Labs — 700 layoffs; Covidien — 595 layoffs; Kinetic Concepts — 427 layoffs; St. Jude Medical — 300 layoffs; and Hill Rom — 200 layoffs.
Among the reasons for the layoffs: increased costs for health insurance and, in the case of medical manufacturing companies, a new medical-device tax.

And that's just "the tip" of the ice berg !

Anyone ever hear of "Fresenius Healthcare" ? I hadn't either before about 6 or 7 months ago; now I find myself in one of their MANY facilities quite frequently; so frequently matter of fact, that the minute Miss A and I walk in the "PD Center", all of the RN's, and the office manager see us, and yell......"hey Charley, hey Miss Arlie"........and come running out to chit chat with us !

If you're unfamiliar with Fresenius HC, you also probably have no idea how many people in the country have CKD; (which is chronic kidney disease)

I don't know the exact numbers either, but I do know this; Fresenius HC is THE biggest "player" in the treatment of kidney disease in the U.S. (and probably also in Europe), as that's where they started out. They have three facilities in Terre Haute, In. (in addition to the hemodialysis center at Union Hospital) Two of these facilities are "hemodialysis centers; (Miss A got her "hemo" at one of them for about 4 months, till she started on "PD" (which she does at home)

Now........the larger of the two hemo centers has about 100 patients; the other one has maybe 65 or 70.

The "PD Clinic" has maybe 50 or 60 patients, most of whom do "PD" ( for "peritoneal dialysis" ) So.......what does all of this add up to, you ask ? The short answer is.......a HELL of a LOT of $$$$$$$$$ ! For example.........

Fresenius HC, until just recently, had about 1,800 dialysis facilities in this country; that figure increased recently, when Fresenius HC "acquired" something like 250 MORE facilities from another company. Keeping all of that in mind..........I recently happened to see what the "cost" of Miss A's first three months of hemodialysis was.........just shy of $60,000. I should mention, that figure is completely separate from THREE surgeries, each one of which incurred a $10,000 charge for use of the O.R., plus three surgeon's fees (which are each MORE than that), not to mention 39 days total admittance (over 3 different stays) at Union Hospital , in addition to one out-patient "procedure" at Community Hospital in Indianapolis, and continuing care and services from about 6 or 7 other doctors.

In talking with staff at Union Hospital and several more "providers" in Terre Haute recently, I'm hearing more and more about "cut-backs" and "looming lay-offs" of staff.

Now.........you probably have no reason to be concerned with all of this; as YOU probably don't HAVE chronic kidney disease. (better keep your fingers crossed though.............it happens to a LOT of people !) (from children to people older than me); (and there aren't too many people older than me who are still breathing)

Remembeer that "almost $60,000" figure ? Out of all of that, Miss A's "out-of-pocket" is about $1,700. ( That's largely thanks to L.B.J.'s Medicare Program ) (Which Obama's "Unaffordable Healthcare Program" is tearing apart, piece by piece.) While you're mulling all of that, (and ESPECIALLY all of you "it can't happen HERE, to US" types............), it was recently (past week or so) reported that.........Obama's great "unaffordable health care act" is estimated to ADD yet ANOTHER forty million (with an "m") un-insured, many un-documented individuals to the nation's health care rolls; ( Read: people who have A. no money B. no incentive to make any money C. no business BEING "here" to begin with, and D. no reason to STAY where they are now, when EVERYTHING here is FREE !)

My question then would be.............out of those 40,000,000 (with an "m") indigent people, how many of them do you suppose will have chronic kidney disease, and how much $$$$ do you suppose it will cost the taxpayers of the U.S. to pay for their treatments ?

And, no "rant" here today; everything I have mentioned today is a matter of public record, and can be easily documented by anyone interested. (assuming of course you have any desire to know the facts, rather than wasting your time calling everyone who disagrees with you "names".)

Charley



Stupidity: Doing the same thing over and over and over again and expecting a different result; Albert Einstein
User currently offlineMir From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 21482 posts, RR: 56
Reply 58, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 3087 times:

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 49):
Which actually exist, or will exist under obamacare

They don't, and they won't.

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 49):
It's not good to ration healthcare

Healthcare is a commodity, and any commodity is going to be rationed in a capitalist economy. Is it not rationing when your private healthcare plan refuses to cover something?

-Mir



7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
User currently offlinecmf From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 59, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 3087 times:

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 56):
Any amount of "socialism" needs to be monitored so it doesn't go haywire.

Everything needs to be monitored so it doesn't go haywire. One thing to look out for is when people call for not doing something that is positive because some outlier may abuse it. Forgetting that what they are calling for is abuse from the other direction.


User currently offlinebjorn14 From Norway, joined Feb 2010, 3381 posts, RR: 2
Reply 60, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 3085 times:

Quoting cws818 (Reply 54):
After all, you are the one crusading against "socialism" - put your money where your mouth is.

That argument is a disingenuos one, it's like telling him not to eat the meal he paid for.

Quoting Mir (Reply 58):
They don't, and they won't.

At some level they will, whether it be subtle or overt. If your pool has finite resources who are you going to take care of first, the guy with 15 more years of revenue ponttenial or the retired 80 year old who will continue taking from the system?



"I want to know the voice of God the rest is just details" --A. Einstein
User currently offlineflipdewaf From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2006, 1562 posts, RR: 1
Reply 61, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 3081 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting bjorn14 (Reply 46):
"Woe to those who call good evil and evil good" Isaiah 5:20


"It is our choices… that show what we truly are, far more than our abilities" Albus Dumbledore:Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets
Not sure what quoting fiction has to do with unsubstantiated and statistically insignificant truths about the stock market fluctuations because of childish anger and mispositioned blame.

Fred


User currently offlinestarbuk7 From United States of America, joined Apr 2008, 599 posts, RR: 5
Reply 62, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 3082 times:

Quoting casinterest (Reply 44):
Both parties do it, but in the case of the GOP and it's Fake News network, more scare and featr and misinformation get spread to the masses.
Quoting SmittyOne (Reply 45):
I'm not looking to jab you about what you do with your money - if you give a lot of it away, then good for you. If you don't, then good for you.


Funny how people talk here and group so many people into categories. You blast the GOP for this and that, you blast Christians for this or that, you blast so many other group for this or that but never offer solutions for anything.

Charity is not just donating money but can also be donating time. The time you take to go to a Christian soup kitchen to help prepare and serve those that are hungry. The time that you take out of your day to go to a Christian donation center to help sort donated clothes to give to those living on the streets to keep them warm. The time that you take out of your day to go to a Christian center to help those same people to find work and get back on their feet. And no, these places do not have to be Christian because there are others that help with these things as well.

Now that your health care has gone up along with everything else you may need to find a second job (if you can) which takes the time you had extra to do the things listed above.

All you want is more taxes for you to redistribute however you seem to feel it needs redistributed. I feel along with many others let us decide who to help with our money, all the government needs is what it takes to keep the infrastructure and defense programs working, they should not bee in the business of welfare and health care.


User currently offlinecasinterest From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 4458 posts, RR: 2
Reply 63, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 3079 times:

Quoting starbuk7 (Reply 62):
Funny how people talk here and group so many people into categories. You blast the GOP for this and that, you blast Christians for this or that, you blast so many other group for this or that but never offer solutions for anything.

This is irrelevant to the point I am making about the GOP and it's Fake News Network. You are trying to equate a soup kitchen and Charity with the downright bashing of the administration, the ignorance of finance and accounting. The ignorance of pushing their government into people's bedrooms and personal decisions. At the end of the day, the Federal Government has some responsibilities, costs, and burdens that the average citizen does not. There is no soup kitchen for the Federal Government. Whether you agree with those responsibilities or not is not the concern, until the country and the representatives wish to roll back it's responsibilities. It has to take care of it's responsibilities without insurance, parental support, or other items. It has to borrow against it's reputation when tough times hit.
The problem with the Tea Party and GOP is that they pretend this massive deficit occurred because of Obama and his administration. It did not. It occurred because of responsibilities and programs that the Government had to take care of. When the economy went down, Revenue plummeted, social security revenue plummeted, ,medicare payments plummeted. That didn't stop the fact that the Government still had to pay for it's collective responsibilities. The only choice was to run the deficit up. The alternative would be that the country would have gone into a depression.
the Fake News network makes it worse in that their reporters have no integrity and sacrifice facts and a real story for political opinion and pandering to a group of people that want to hear that opinion that jives with their own.

To say I haven't offered any solutions and the Democrats haven't is preposterous. The problem for the GOP is they would rather the country runs into a brick wall, then ask the people that can afford it to pay for more for the services this country needs to keep it going. There used to be a good GOP back in the day, but they have allowed some very ignorant folks to hijack it and turn it into a vile organization more attuned to demonizing others lives and opinions than offering viable alternatives.

Enjoy your church offered soup kitchens, but remember they come with a cost of asking those that can afford to pay for it to run those programs. Without revenue, the Church can't offer anything.

Quoting starbuk7 (Reply 62):

Now that your health care has gone up along with everything else you may need to find a second job (if you can) which takes the time you had extra to do the things listed above.

Health care was already a massive problem with double digit percentage increases before Obamacare. The difference was more and more people were not able to afford it , and more and more people were paying the bills for it. Hospitals don't charge those outrageous fees because everyone is paying.

Quoting starbuk7 (Reply 62):

All you want is more taxes for you to redistribute however you seem to feel it needs redistributed. I feel along with many others let us decide who to help with our money, all the government needs is what it takes to keep the infrastructure and defense programs working, they should not bee in the business of welfare and health care.

This is the part that is just bogus in the whole argument. Taxes are lower than they have been for everyone in the past 50 years, however the deficit is now 15 trillion. Arguments about lower taxes are a discussion to have when the debt is paid off. Until then ,as the Economy recovers, it is only prudent to put a buffer in place that closes the current account deficit between revenue and spending. It needs to be done prudently and in steps from both sides. Rising Revenue, and lower spending. The GOP's current stance is that only one choice is viable, and this is incorrect. Especially since the folks at the upper end of the income range can afford it.

Some of the spending will go down due to less people on welfare, and some of the revenue will rise just from people going back to work. However not only do we need to close the gap, we need to exceed it if the national debt is going to be paid off.



Older than I just was ,and younger than I will soo be.
User currently offlinestarbuk7 From United States of America, joined Apr 2008, 599 posts, RR: 5
Reply 64, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 3079 times:

Quoting casinterest (Reply 63):
At the end of the day, the Federal Government has some responsibilities, costs, and burdens that the average citizen does not.


Sure they do, and they DO NOT include health care and welfare. Believe it or not those two items are not listed in the constitution as being provided by the government, if the states want to do it well good for them.

Quoting casinterest (Reply 63):
The difference was more and more people were not able to afford it , and more and more people were paying the bills for it.


Again, not the governments problem. All the other insurance companies seem to work just fine, home, auto, life, etc, etc. State concern, not federal.

Quoting casinterest (Reply 63):
Taxes are lower than they have been for everyone in the past 50 years, however the deficit is now 15 trillion.

So you can pay more, MY taxes have not gone down in the last 4 years, and now you want to take more money from the people that can hire more employees, good move, so they have less money and have to lay off, not hire, or go out of business.

With lower taxes, they can hire more people who will be, "guess what", paying taxes, which will offset the lower taxes because more people are paying taxes. Funny how that works, huh.


User currently offlinePHX787 From Japan, joined Mar 2012, 7167 posts, RR: 17
Reply 65, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 3083 times:

Quoting Mir (Reply 58):
Healthcare is a commodity, and any commodity is going to be rationed in a capitalist economy. Is it not rationing when your private healthcare plan refuses to cover something?

You completely contradicted your earlier arguments. If healthcare is a commodity, it SHOULD NOT be controlled by the government. If a private health care plan refuses something, it's probably because it is a company failing, and in most cases, would "sell" your account to a different healthcare provider in order to get money to pay off its debtors so it can escape bankruptcy.


Seriously, that's the only thing I see that happens with companies anymore. No more arguing about the past because in most companies, they began to cut the denial of service due to preexisting conditions.


Source? Family members work for insurance companies.



One of the FB admins for PHX Spotters. "Zach the Expat!"
User currently offlinecasinterest From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 4458 posts, RR: 2
Reply 66, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 3079 times:

Quoting starbuk7 (Reply 64):
Sure they do, and they DO NOT include health care and welfare. Believe it or not those two items are not listed in the constitution as being provided by the government, if the states want to do it well good for them.

But the states have a problem in that hey can't run budget deficits, so taking these items on in the states doesn't make sense without the Federal government, and thus everyone paying for it anyway. Just because it is not in the constitution does not prohibit it from being a good idea for the federal government to handle it. Could it be done better. Probably. But that can be said for anything any piece of Government attempts. Health care and welfare extend beyond state and job boundaries as they are issues that exists at all courses of life wherever you live.

Quoting starbuk7 (Reply 64):

Again, not the governments problem. All the other insurance companies seem to work just fine, home, auto, life, etc, etc. State concern, not federal.


It's not a state concern, it is a personal concern. Insurance companies were just the middle men in the expense battle between those with and without and the dealings with the hospitals and patients. Could the state handle it? Perhaps in some states, but not all, and what happens if I live in state and pay insurance all my life then go to a state without that coverage, or I never paid insurance all my life but moved to a state just because they have the coverage. It becomes a national issue.

Quoting starbuk7 (Reply 64):
So you can pay more, MY taxes have not gone down in the last 4 years

Those are your personal taxes. The federal Government rates have gone down. If you were still in the same position you were in 4 years ago with the same deductions and credits and same pay, it would be down due to the change in FICA.

Quoting starbuk7 (Reply 64):
With lower taxes, they can hire more people who will be, "guess what", paying taxes, which will offset the lower taxes because more people are paying taxes. Funny how that works, huh.

This would work great if everyone was humping like the Duggars, and we allowed immigrants to come into the country with a smile and a wave, but it isn't the way this country works, and it also ignores the colossal debt that currently exists.



Older than I just was ,and younger than I will soo be.
User currently offlinestarbuk7 From United States of America, joined Apr 2008, 599 posts, RR: 5
Reply 67, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 3082 times:

Quoting casinterest (Reply 66):
The federal Government rates have gone down.


Who exactly do you think I am referring to, I pay FEDERAL taxes and they have not gone down. I have the numbers to prove it.

Quoting casinterest (Reply 66):
This would work great if everyone was humping like the Duggars, and we allowed immigrants to come into the country with a smile and a wave, but it isn't the way this country works,


Everyone who is able to work should be working, not collecting welfare. Your federal government has made it so easy for people to just "leech" that that is all they know how to do, they have never "worked" a day in their lives. The deficit got that way because of all the "entitlement programs". And giving these programs to all the illegals does not help the situation either. Raising taxes is NOT the answer, you can pay all the higher taxes you want to, I'm sure the government will take them, but I would like to keep more of the money the I "work" for and donate it as"I" see fit, not the government. Get some money back from your "entitlement" recipients if you need to pay the deficit.


User currently offlineAirframeAS From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 14150 posts, RR: 24
Reply 68, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 3080 times:

Quoting casinterest (Reply 66):
The federal Government rates have gone down.

No they have not. They have either been kind of steady or is going up.



A Safe Flight Begins With Quality Maintenance On The Ground.
User currently offlineMir From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 21482 posts, RR: 56
Reply 69, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 3083 times:

Quoting bjorn14 (Reply 60):
If your pool has finite resources who are you going to take care of first, the guy with 15 more years of revenue ponttenial or the retired 80 year old who will continue taking from the system?

Sounds like the sort of decision a private insurance company would be making as well.

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 65):
If a private health care plan refuses something, it's probably because it is a company failing, and in most cases, would "sell" your account to a different healthcare provider in order to get money to pay off its debtors so it can escape bankruptcy.

Perfectly solvent insurance companies refuse to cover certain procedures all the time.

-Mir



7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
User currently offlinecasinterest From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 4458 posts, RR: 2
Reply 70, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 3081 times:

Quoting starbuk7 (Reply 67):

Who exactly do you think I am referring to, I pay FEDERAL taxes and they have not gone down. I have the numbers to prove it.

FICA is Federal, and it has gone down.

Quoting starbuk7 (Reply 67):
Everyone who is able to work should be working, not collecting welfare

Working at what? When we had the recession, employers stopped paying people to work.

Quoting starbuk7 (Reply 67):
The deficit got that way because of all the "entitlement programs".

Social Security and Medicare were very solvent until recently. You will find that our Defense spending is one of the biggest costs without any real monetary return, and also the interest on the debt.

Quoting starbuk7 (Reply 67):
Raising taxes is NOT the answer,

It is part of the solution. Especially since it is very clear that there wasn't any money in some "rainy day" fund . I am not selling it as the full answer. Sorry you didn't understand that. Taxes must go up and spending must come down until we find a balanced point were programs are paid for, and the debt is going down.

Quoting AirframeAS (Reply 68):
No they have not. They have either been kind of steady or is going up.

Fica for Social Security was 6.2 % of your paycheck 4 years ago.
It is currently 4.2 %.

Now if you want to speak about the brackets having their annualized increases, well then that kind of points out that the trickle down is not working so well, as those are inflation indexed.



Older than I just was ,and younger than I will soo be.
User currently offlineAirframeAS From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 14150 posts, RR: 24
Reply 71, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 3083 times:

Quoting casinterest (Reply 70):
FICA is Federal, and it has gone down.

Mine has gone nowhere but UP.

Quoting casinterest (Reply 70):
Fica for Social Security was 6.2 % of your paycheck 4 years ago.
It is currently 4.2 %.

That also has gone up as well. And I'm not married at all with zero kids.

My entire withholding taxes from my paycheck has gone up compared to last year. (Yes, I have looked & compared. No, I will not share my paychecks with you.)



A Safe Flight Begins With Quality Maintenance On The Ground.
User currently offlinecasinterest From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 4458 posts, RR: 2
Reply 72, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 3082 times:

Quoting AirframeAS (Reply 71):
Mine has gone nowhere but UP.

And you are comparing FICA and Fed, and no salary increase?

Quoting AirframeAS (Reply 71):
My entire withholding taxes from my paycheck has gone up compared to last year. (Yes, I have looked & compared. No, I will not share my paychecks with you.)

That is your withholding ,and not your final tax. If you changed your claims on the W-4 and state forms , it will affect your withholding.



Older than I just was ,and younger than I will soo be.
User currently offlinetugger From United States of America, joined Apr 2006, 5411 posts, RR: 8
Reply 73, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 3082 times:

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 56):
Any amount of "socialism" needs to be monitored so it doesn't go haywire.

OK, so what amount of "monitored socialism" do you find acceptable? At least we know that some level of socialism is acceptable to you (but it of course has to be monitored and controlled).

Quoting starbuk7 (Reply 64):
Sure they do, and they DO NOT include health care and welfare. Believe it or not those two items are not listed in the constitution as being provided by the government, if the states want to do it well good for them.

It depends on how you interpret the Constitution. I view healthcare as integral with interstate commerce, the general welfare and the defense of the nation. "The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;"

Quoting starbuk7 (Reply 64):
So you can pay more, MY taxes have not gone down in the last 4 years, and now you want to take more money from the people that can hire more employees, good move, so they have less money and have to lay off, not hire, or go out of business.

With lower taxes, they can hire more people who will be, "guess what", paying taxes, which will offset the lower taxes because more people are paying taxes. Funny how that works, huh.

Of course your taxes have not gone down in the last 4 years. The current structure was put in place ten + years ago.
And if you are concerned about hiring, then offer a tax cut/break/credit for hiring people equal to the added taxes. I have favored that for a long time. The more US citizens your employ stateside the lower the taxes you should pay.

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 65):
You completely contradicted your earlier arguments. If healthcare is a commodity, it SHOULD NOT be controlled by the government. If a private health care plan refuses something, it's probably because it is a company failing, and in most cases, would "sell" your account to a different healthcare provider in order to get money to pay off its debtors so it can escape bankruptcy.

Actually the reason why services are normally refused is because they have no means to adequately fund for them because anyone could come to them at anytime seeking care. That is why the "mandate" is so important. Everyone has to pay into the healthcare system, they way we have it now, where many pay nothing and then take advantage of it needs to be addressed. To me, the mandate makes perfect sense though I would have just had it an an element of tax policy (which is what the USSC ruled it).

Tugg



I don’t know that I am unafraid to be myself, but it is hard to be somebody else. -W. Shatner
User currently offlineMaverick623 From United States of America, joined Nov 2006, 5562 posts, RR: 6
Reply 74, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 3085 times:

Quoting PHX787 (Thread starter):
We all know the stock market tanked the last few says

The stock market has not "tanked". It suffered a slight loss, which is COMPLETELY NORMAL FOR A STOCK MARKET.

Quoting PHX787 (Thread starter):
Apparently 45 companies have announced layoffs.

OOOOHHHH. 45 whole companies (out of the hundreds of thousands out there)... here's a fun fact: they would have laid off those people anyways.

Quoting PHX787 (Thread starter):

Obamacare will destroy small businesses AND corporations alike. The very organizations needed to hire people to get our economy back on track, they're laying off.

Thoughts?

You offer up a lot of FOX-inspired bluster, with zero evidence backing any of it. Instead, you rely on the correlation=causation fallacy and laughably state that a single person will destroy America.



"PHX is Phoenix, PDX is the other city" -777Way
User currently offlineAirframeAS From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 14150 posts, RR: 24
Reply 75, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 3078 times:

Quoting casinterest (Reply 72):
And you are comparing FICA and Fed, and no salary increase?

Yup.



A Safe Flight Begins With Quality Maintenance On The Ground.
User currently offlinecasinterest From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 4458 posts, RR: 2
Reply 76, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 3078 times:

Quoting AirframeAS (Reply 75):
Yup.

So in the past 4 years (even the last year not withstanding inflation ), your taxes are up?

If that is the case you need to go discuss it with the finance department at your company. Because something is truly messed up and it isn't the federal taxes.



Older than I just was ,and younger than I will soo be.
User currently offlineAirframeAS From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 14150 posts, RR: 24
Reply 77, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 3082 times:

Quoting casinterest (Reply 76):
So in the past 4 years (even the last year not withstanding inflation ), your taxes are up?

I'm not talking about the last four years. I'm talking about 2011 and 2012 comparison.



A Safe Flight Begins With Quality Maintenance On The Ground.
User currently offlinecasinterest From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 4458 posts, RR: 2
Reply 78, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 3083 times:

Quoting starbuk7 (Reply 64):
So you can pay more, MY taxes have not gone down in the last 4 years, and now you want to take more money from the people that can hire more employees, good move, so they have less money and have to lay off, not hire, or go out of business.
Quoting AirframeAS (Reply 77):
I'm not talking about the last four years. I'm talking about 2011 and 2012 comparison.

See what happens when you jump in the middle and change the parameters around. Either way, the only thing that has changed in 2011 and 2012 has nothing to do with Federal Tax rates. Just inflation adjusted brackets.

If you are losing more money , then something has changed. That or you really owed a lot of money last year, and are paying the penalty.



Older than I just was ,and younger than I will soo be.
User currently offlineAirframeAS From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 14150 posts, RR: 24
Reply 79, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 3082 times:

Quoting casinterest (Reply 78):
See what happens when you jump in the middle and change the parameters around.

I'm not jumping parameters around. I was never ever talking about the last 4 years. YOU DID. Not me. I was taking specifically comparing 2011 and 2012, year over year.

But no, keep shooting me down. I know what I am looking at. My taxes went up.

Quoting casinterest (Reply 78):
That or you really owed a lot of money last year, and are paying the penalty.

I have gotten tax refunds over the last 10 years or so, just less of it lately, if you even care....which you don't. Keep assuming..... keep assuming.

[Edited 2012-11-14 13:03:15]


A Safe Flight Begins With Quality Maintenance On The Ground.
User currently offlinecasinterest From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 4458 posts, RR: 2
Reply 80, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 3082 times:

Quoting AirframeAS (Reply 79):
But no, keep shooting me down. I know what I am looking at. My taxes went up. Why do you even care?!

I don't , but it isn't because tax rates went up. So don't try to claim otherwise.



Older than I just was ,and younger than I will soo be.
User currently offlineAirframeAS From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 14150 posts, RR: 24
Reply 81, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 3081 times:

Quoting casinterest (Reply 80):
So don't try to claim otherwise.

So are you saying my paychecks are lying to me? Seriously?

Time to move on, Casinterest..... I know what my paychecks are. You don't. Move on.



A Safe Flight Begins With Quality Maintenance On The Ground.
User currently offlinecasinterest From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 4458 posts, RR: 2
Reply 82, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 3082 times:

Quoting AirframeAS (Reply 81):
I know what my paychecks are. You don't. Move on.

Paychecks only reflect withholding, not your final tax bill, but I can tell that debating the difference is past the depth of the tax discussion that you wish to engage in.



Older than I just was ,and younger than I will soo be.
User currently offlinepar13del From Bahamas, joined Dec 2005, 7041 posts, RR: 8
Reply 83, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 3080 times:

Quoting casinterest (Reply 66):
But the states have a problem in that hey can't run budget deficits,

Ah no, some states do, others have chosen to pass balance budget amendments because they recognize and accept the negative effects of running deficits.
Now those states who do not have such amendments and run deficits quickly go broke and their IOU's are pretty worthless.

Quoting casinterest (Reply 66):
Just because it is not in the constitution does not prohibit it from being a good idea for the federal government to handle it.

The same applies to budget deficits, just because folks say its a bad thing and want to decrease it does not mean that they are anti-American.


User currently offlineNewark727 From United States of America, joined Dec 2009, 1332 posts, RR: 0
Reply 84, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 3079 times:

Quoting par13del (Reply 83):

Ah no, some states do, others have chosen to pass balance budget amendments because they recognize and accept the negative effects of running deficits.
Now those states who do not have such amendments and run deficits quickly go broke and their IOU's are pretty worthless.

The other thing that happens though, whether a balanced budget is forcing the cuts or a general lack of cash is forcing the cuts, is that you stop being able to pay for local services and schools go to crap, bridges fall down, and so on. The more local the government the more fragile its revenue streams, e.g. if a city loses a lot of jobs in the recession it gets fewer property taxes and soon it can't have a police anymore. The problem with state-by-state policymaking arguments is that they don't account for states and localities having fewer parameters to adjust their budgets with. And the local tax revolt movements such as Proposition 13 in California gain the most traction at that level as well. I don't want to take much beyond the generic liberal side on this, because state governance is not an especially partisan issue if you look at the matter in a broad sense, but I just want to say.


User currently offlinepar13del From Bahamas, joined Dec 2005, 7041 posts, RR: 8
Reply 85, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 3079 times:

Quoting Newark727 (Reply 84):
The other thing that happens though, whether a balanced budget is forcing the cuts or a general lack of cash is forcing the cuts, is that you stop being able to pay for local services and schools go to crap, bridges fall down, and so on.

Well money is not really the problem is it, it is rumoured that the USA at the Federal and State level spend more money on education than most other countries in the world, yet the education system is still a mess in some areas.
A lot of stimulus money was pumped into infrastructure, jobs ready to go, and yet nothing, it was not that money was not available but the planning and those behind the projects were either in-competent, not ready or just not up to the task, lack of money is not the root cause of the majority of problems.

Quoting Newark727 (Reply 84):
The more local the government the more fragile its revenue streams, e.g. if a city loses a lot of jobs in the recession it gets fewer property taxes and soon it can't have a police anymore.

Well the USA system mandates local government, a number of well managed cities, municipalities and states are weathering the recession much better than the Federal government who as stated has the ability to run deficits.
Another point on the local services, especially police and fire, ever wonder why in some states and cities those are the first services up for cuts, are they not essentially to everyone? If they are so essential why are their budgets not buffered during good times?? No need, the fear of loosing them always seems to allow politicians the ability to pass more taxes, cut other services, bonds, etc. etc. etc, its the politics of fear.


User currently offlinebjorn14 From Norway, joined Feb 2010, 3381 posts, RR: 2
Reply 86, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 3084 times:

Quoting Maverick623 (Reply 74):
they would have laid off those people anyways.

Curious that they waited until after the election. Good thing your company wasn't on that list.



"I want to know the voice of God the rest is just details" --A. Einstein
User currently offlineSmittyOne From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 87, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 3078 times:

Quoting starbuk7 (Reply 62):
You blast the GOP for this and that, you blast Christians for this or that, you blast so many other group for this or that but never offer solutions for anything.

I don't have "the" solution, but a good start would be to leave the religious mumbo-jumbo out of politics, and stop dragging us down rabbit holes on morality issues that the Government should stay out of. Then our legislators could spend their time and energy focusing on just how much the Government ought to get involved in economic issues. As it is now the ideological divide is too great to work together on anything.

Quoting starbuk7 (Reply 62):
All you want is more taxes for you to redistribute however you seem to feel it needs redistributed.

Not true. I have many very rational concerns about the negative impact this has on our free market system. But I also realize that our system relies on a healthy, reasonably secure workforce. Where those two curves intersect is the right amount of Government involvement in economics/health care etc.

Quoting starbuk7 (Reply 67):
Everyone who is able to work should be working, not collecting welfare. Your federal government has made it so easy for people to just "leech" that that is all they know how to do, they have never "worked" a day in their lives. The deficit got that way because of all the "entitlement programs". And giving these programs to all the illegals does not help the situation either. Raising taxes is NOT the answer, you can pay all the higher taxes you want to, I'm sure the government will take them, but I would like to keep more of the money the I "work" for and donate it as"I" see fit, not the government. Get some money back from your "entitlement" recipients if you need to pay the deficit.

This makes for a great soundbite, but it shows that you haven't looked very closely at the federal budget. Defense is the costliest government 'service', and career military members & the old folks who have worked their entire lives paying into Social Security/Medicare make up the bulk of current entitlement payments. Cut off all the slackers and welfare moms tomorrow and the country will still be way in the red.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/2/2b/U.S._Federal_Spending_-_FY_2011.png/800px-U.S._Federal_Spending_-_FY_2011.png


User currently offlineNewark727 From United States of America, joined Dec 2009, 1332 posts, RR: 0
Reply 88, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 3077 times:

Quoting par13del (Reply 85):

Well the USA system mandates local government, a number of well managed cities, municipalities and states are weathering the recession much better than the Federal government who as stated has the ability to run deficits.

And other, poorly managed cities, municipalities, and states are either bankrupt or nearly so. Like I was trying to say, it's not so much an inability to run deficits, that's short-sighted and reduces flexibility for "rainy days." It's a question of not forcing states and local governments to control certain expensive services on ideological principal when the federal government has the leverage to provide them more consistently.

Quoting par13del (Reply 85):

Well money is not really the problem is it, it is rumoured that the USA at the Federal and State level spend more money on education than most other countries in the world, yet the education system is still a mess in some areas.
A lot of stimulus money was pumped into infrastructure, jobs ready to go, and yet nothing, it was not that money was not available but the planning and those behind the projects were either in-competent, not ready or just not up to the task, lack of money is not the root cause of the majority of problems.

If lack of money isn't the problem now, it will be later. And in some places it really is the problem now as they have no one to pay taxes which means no one to sustain neighborhoods that people actually want to live in which means more people leave. Though you're half right on the planning aspect because some ways of constructing growth in housing and other development are far easier on the pocketbook in the long term than others.


User currently offlinepar13del From Bahamas, joined Dec 2005, 7041 posts, RR: 8
Reply 89, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 3081 times:

Quoting Newark727 (Reply 88):
It's a question of not forcing states and local governments to control certain expensive services on ideological principal when the federal government has the leverage to provide them more consistently.

I may accept the financial aspect but surely you don't believe that the Fed is devoid of idealogical principal?

Deficit spending has been on a continual increase with minor bumps in speed and percentage increase, some folks say it has to be paid off, a lot believe that day will not arrive in their lifetime, so does the debt really need to be paid off?
Increasing the debt ceiling is a simple vote, a majority think the TP was nuts to be against it, so.......


User currently offlinePHX787 From Japan, joined Mar 2012, 7167 posts, RR: 17
Reply 90, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 2 days 4 hours ago) and read 3083 times:

Quoting Mir (Reply 69):
Perfectly solvent insurance companies refuse to cover certain procedures all the time.

Usually it's just a procedure that is either voluntary, such as a breast enhancement procedure.



One of the FB admins for PHX Spotters. "Zach the Expat!"
User currently offlineSmittyOne From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 91, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 2 days ago) and read 3079 times:

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 90):
Usually it's just a procedure that is either voluntary, such as a breast enhancement procedure.

It occurs to me that what we really need are Breast Panels to ensure consistent quality in this area  


User currently offlinebjorn14 From Norway, joined Feb 2010, 3381 posts, RR: 2
Reply 92, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 23 hours ago) and read 3079 times:

Hostess (maker of Twinkies, DingDongs) might liquidate their business on 11/16 costing 18K jobs.

http://www.sfgate.com/news/texas/art...cision-expected-Friday-4041001.php



"I want to know the voice of God the rest is just details" --A. Einstein
User currently offlineMir From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 21482 posts, RR: 56
Reply 93, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 22 hours ago) and read 3077 times:

Quoting bjorn14 (Reply 92):
Hostess (maker of Twinkies, DingDongs) might liquidate their business on 11/16 costing 18K jobs.

Pfff, not even a nuclear war can get rid of those things.

Of course, if you read the article you'll see that it has nothing to do with any governmental policies. Never mind that their business model is suffering in the current "eat healthy" environment. Carry on trying to pin it on Obama.  

-Mir



7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
User currently offlineSmittyOne From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 94, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 21 hours ago) and read 3074 times:

Quoting Mir (Reply 93):
Of course, if you read the article you'll see that it has nothing to do with any governmental policies. Never mind that their business model is suffering in the current "eat healthy" environment. Carry on trying to pin it on Obama.

That's Michelle's fault  


User currently offlineDreadnought From United States of America, joined Feb 2008, 8785 posts, RR: 24
Reply 95, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 20 hours ago) and read 3076 times:

Quoting Mir (Reply 93):
Carry on trying to pin it on Obama.

Nobody is. It's the Union which is the problem here. The company is already under bankruptcy protection. The company’s delivery drivers are Teamsters, who voted by a narrow margin to take a pay cut and benefit renegotiations in September rather than have the drivers lose their jobs in a down market. But the Bakery union say “No way” and decided on a strike rather than take a pay cut and reduced benefits.

I guess elections DO have consequences....92% voted to reject the contract....100% now out of work. I bet those Teamsters drivers are happy with the Bakery union tonight.



Veni Vidi Castratavi Illegitimos
User currently offlineflipdewaf From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2006, 1562 posts, RR: 1
Reply 96, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 20 hours ago) and read 3075 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting SmittyOne (Reply 94):
That's Michelle's fault

The only thing more upsetting to some republicans than a black man in the white house is that maybe a woman wears the trousers!


User currently offlineMir From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 21482 posts, RR: 56
Reply 97, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 19 hours ago) and read 3071 times:

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 95):
Nobody is.

Posting it in the thread about how companies might have to lay people off under Obama isn't trying to pin it on Obama?

-Mir



7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
User currently offlinealoges From Germany, joined Jan 2006, 8680 posts, RR: 43
Reply 98, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 19 hours ago) and read 3073 times:

Quoting flipdewaf (Reply 96):
The only thing more upsetting to some republicans than a black man in the white house is that maybe a woman wears the trousers!

Sad, but true to an extent - the "birther" nonsense is built on avoiding racial terms and slurs through calling Obama a Kenyan.



Walk together, talk together all ye peoples of the earth. Then, and only then, shall ye have peace.
User currently offlineDreadnought From United States of America, joined Feb 2008, 8785 posts, RR: 24
Reply 99, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 18 hours ago) and read 3073 times:

Quoting Mir (Reply 100):
Posting it in the thread about how companies might have to lay people off under Obama isn't trying to pin it on Obama?

It's broadly related, but nothing in the post or related articles pinned it on Obama in any way.

Quoting aloges (Reply 101):
Sad, but true to an extent - the "birther" nonsense is built on avoiding racial terms and slurs through calling Obama a Kenyan.

You just blew up your own logic. Not that i buy into the whole birther thing, but doesn't their whole argument hinge on Obama being born in another country (Kenya, France or wherever) and not of his race?

Quoting flipdewaf (Reply 102):
Would you suggest that I go and personally meet every single republican eligible to vote? how else do you suggest I get my information?

As you can see in aloges' post, Obama's synchophants attempt to paint any opposition to Obama as being racist. You just need a healthy dose of skepticism, particularly when everyone around you tends to say and think the same way.



Veni Vidi Castratavi Illegitimos
User currently offlinebjorn14 From Norway, joined Feb 2010, 3381 posts, RR: 2
Reply 100, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 17 hours ago) and read 3070 times:

Quoting aloges (Reply 98):
Sad, but true to an extent - the "birther" nonsense is built on avoiding racial terms and slurs through calling Obama a Kenyan.

And when someone is legit in opposing Obama's policies, everyone SCREAMS they are a racist. Thus immunizing him ftom ANY criticsm.



"I want to know the voice of God the rest is just details" --A. Einstein
User currently offlineflipdewaf From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2006, 1562 posts, RR: 1
Reply 101, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 17 hours ago) and read 3069 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting bjorn14 (Reply 101):
And when someone is legit in opposing Obama's policies, everyone SCREAMS they are a racist

I'm not sure I have seen that to be honest, do you mean like Ali G used to say?

Fred


User currently offlineDeltaMD90 From United States of America, joined Apr 2008, 7788 posts, RR: 52
Reply 102, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 17 hours ago) and read 3080 times:

Quoting flipdewaf (Reply 102):
Quoting bjorn14 (Reply 101):
And when someone is legit in opposing Obama's policies, everyone SCREAMS they are a racist

I'm not sure I have seen that to be honest, do you mean like Ali G used to say?

Actually I've seen it a lot too. Just go into a thread, there will be a discussion of his policies, and then someone will say "blah blah blah, some people will always be upset that their president is a black man." I'm not saying there really aren't people that are racist against the president, but I've seen race thrown in in random threads for NO reason. I mean NO reason at all. Sometimes you can kinda argue there may be race but trust me, a lot of times, it's totally out of the blue.

I usually jump on these people (there seem to be a few chronic offenders I won't name) because it's a lazy argument and all it does is just open up a side argument you can't win because it had nothing to do with the topic in the first place.

Now bjorn14 may be exaggerating a bit, there have been plenty of threads where the race card hasn't been pulled, but I feel his pain. It is whipped out wayyyy too much



Ironically I have never flown a Delta MD-90 :)
User currently offlineMir From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 21482 posts, RR: 56
Reply 103, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 17 hours ago) and read 3081 times:

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 100):
It's broadly related

It's not at all related. The strike didn't happen because Obama won the election. Hostess's business model isn't failing because Obama won the election. This would have happened anyway.

-Mir



7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
User currently offlineDreadnought From United States of America, joined Feb 2008, 8785 posts, RR: 24
Reply 104, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 17 hours ago) and read 3082 times:

Quoting Mir (Reply 104):
The strike didn't happen because Obama won the election. Hostess's business model isn't failing because Obama won the election. This would have happened anyway.

On that we agree. I said it's broadly related because it is a post-election layoff scenario, but in this case it is more of a coincidence than anything else.



Veni Vidi Castratavi Illegitimos
User currently offlinetugger From United States of America, joined Apr 2006, 5411 posts, RR: 8
Reply 105, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 16 hours ago) and read 3080 times:

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 105):
On that we agree. I said it's broadly related because it is a post-election layoff scenario, but in this case it is more of a coincidence than anything else.


Dreadnought, just curious but why can't you simply say:"in this case it is only coincidence and nothing else.". Why even the intimation that there is in any way a connection?

Is there really any "more of" in this case?

Tugg



I don’t know that I am unafraid to be myself, but it is hard to be somebody else. -W. Shatner
User currently offlineDreadnought From United States of America, joined Feb 2008, 8785 posts, RR: 24
Reply 106, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 16 hours ago) and read 3080 times:

Quoting tugger (Reply 105):
Dreadnought, just curious but why can't you simply say:"in this case it is only coincidence and nothing else."

I'm not a lawyer. Stop being so picky.



Veni Vidi Castratavi Illegitimos
User currently offlinetugger From United States of America, joined Apr 2006, 5411 posts, RR: 8
Reply 107, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 16 hours ago) and read 3084 times:

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 106):
I'm not a lawyer. Stop being so picky.

Come on Dread, you are very smart and very capable and well spoken, and you have "picked at" others for similar things. You and I both know and understand that here on A.net things are read and re-read and picked at and challenged for even minor things.

Honestly I meant no offense, I was genuinely curious but I understand that it was in no way your intent and I accept that fully.

Tugg



I don’t know that I am unafraid to be myself, but it is hard to be somebody else. -W. Shatner
User currently offlineStarAC17 From Canada, joined Aug 2003, 3354 posts, RR: 9
Reply 108, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 16 hours ago) and read 3080 times:

Quoting PlanesNTrains (Reply 18):
If you have 4 employees working about 35 hours a week, it is very possible that you will look to hire a new employee and reduce the existing employees hours. Personally, I will gauge it based partly on performance and life circumstance, but I can guarantee that every business needs to find a way to mitigate the increased financial burden, and one of those ways is to reduce hours.

IIRC the mandate for a small business to have health care to their staff only takes effect if that company has more than 50 full time employees.

Quoting Ken777 (Reply 25):
No it won't, If some small business owners don't want to keep going then there will be others who will step in, perform the work and hire the people.

  

Quoting PlanesNTrains (Reply 14):
Pay an extra $500/month for healthcare for low/lower wage employees with limited skills? Those days will end for a great many people, and they are precisely the ones that need to be working as much as possible to support their families. I think we will have a lot of really healthy but desperately poor people, and an even larger percentage paying no net federal income taxes (or getting thousands of dollars more back then they ever paid in).

The whole point of the ACA is that everyone has to have skin in the game to spread the cost of health care across the whole population and unless we start to allow people to die when they don't have coverage, you and every other American are paying for it anyways when that person goes to the ER.

Quoting flood (Reply 27):
Blackberry (RIM) has been in the crapper for years. In fact, their stock came crashing down in 2008. I guess that makes their demise Bush's fault  

RIM isn't American and its failures are the reason a lot of companies struggle which is their failure to innovate to be a step ahead of the curve on a constant basis. It's losses aren't because their employees make too much and actually being in Canada they don't have to pay the bulk of their employees health insurance.

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 22):
We right wingers, and especially a lot of us here in the American southwest really have a lot of fear when people wish America was more like europe. We simply cannot be europe! And especially now with Europe in massive debt, we don't want that kind of government, and a lot of employers are saying that may come from a second term Obama regime.

Stop looking at the PIIGS as the fact that there is nothing the US can learn from Europe as there is plenty. Germany is a very strong economy on the world stage whom as a country is known for high quality innovatitive products also in Germany people get 5-6 weeks of paid vacation every year and have a universal health care system that covers everyone for much less cost. Same can be said of the Scandinavian countries, the only thing that is done there is they pay higher taxes, but is Americans consider health insurance as a tax you are not paying much less than the Europeans and Canadians.

Quoting casinterest (Reply 63):
The problem with the Tea Party and GOP is that they pretend this massive deficit occurred because of Obama and his administration. It did not. It occurred because of responsibilities and programs that the Government had to take care of. When the economy went down, Revenue plummeted, social security revenue plummeted, ,medicare payments plummeted.

  

Had revenues stayed constant this defecit wouldn't raise an eye.

Quoting casinterest (Reply 63):
This is the part that is just bogus in the whole argument. Taxes are lower than they have been for everyone in the past 50 years, however the deficit is now 15 trillion.
Quoting starbuk7 (Reply 67):
Everyone who is able to work should be working, not collecting welfare.

To be a little bit contrary here even though I agree with your point 100%.

Everyone is out to seek the thing that best serves their economic interests and if working for a below poverty level minimum wage is an option and making close to the same amount on welfare doing nothing many will become discouraged and lack motivation to work.

What needs to be done is a minimum wage needs to be established that can give most people the chance to be able to eat, have shelter, and cloth themselves. This also helps the economy by increased spending in the lower classes, eases the government burden on entitlements.

Australia has a minimum wage of just over $15 per hour and while not perfect as things do cost more but not double the cost of living in the US and their standard of living is 2nd in the world.

The good news for a lot of people is this doesn't affect you as most people wages are above this and decided on free market principles to begin with.

Quoting Mir (Reply 93):
Pfff, not even a nuclear war can get rid of those things.

A sign we shouldn't eat something is if you leave it out for a week and its still intact every other living thing has said we don't want to eat this crap which means literally bulls*it is better for you.

The same I think is true for processed cheese and McDonald's fries.



Engineers Rule The World!!!!!
User currently offlinealoges From Germany, joined Jan 2006, 8680 posts, RR: 43
Reply 109, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 13 hours ago) and read 3081 times:

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 99):
Not that i buy into the whole birther thing, but doesn't their whole argument hinge on Obama being born in another country (Kenya, France or wherever) and not of his race?

How so? It was known and repeatedly proven that Barack Obama is a natural-born American. I dimly recall that McCain was born in the Panama Canal Zone, which wasn't an integral part of the US, but quite rightfully no noteworthy campaign called him a Panamanian over that. So the difference boiled down to race: the candidate with the black father couldn't possibly be a "real" American while the white one was cleared of such suspicions in the blink of an eye. But even the birthers realised, miraculously, that racial discrimination was going to hurt their cause more than help it, so they called him a "Kenyan" in public.

Quoting bjorn14 (Reply 100):
And when someone is legit in opposing Obama's policies, everyone SCREAMS they are a racist.

Is that so?    Perhaps you would be met with different reactions if you phrased your criticism somewhat differently.

I for one would be more than happy to have a level-headed discussion about his first term, obviously including both criticism and praise, due to my interest in US politics which I have because I like the country and also consider it a fascinating study subject. However, that seems hardly possible in this forum.



Walk together, talk together all ye peoples of the earth. Then, and only then, shall ye have peace.
User currently offlineDreadnought From United States of America, joined Feb 2008, 8785 posts, RR: 24
Reply 110, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 13 hours ago) and read 3084 times:

Quoting aloges (Reply 109):
How so? It was known and repeatedly proven that Barack Obama is a natural-born American. I dimly recall that McCain was born in the Panama Canal Zone, which wasn't an integral part of the US, but quite rightfully no noteworthy campaign called him a Panamanian over that. So the difference boiled down to race: the candidate with the black father couldn't possibly be a "real" American while the white one was cleared of such suspicions in the blink of an eye.

No, the difference boiled down to McCain being born of 2 American parents on an overseas military base, which in the past the Courts have allowed to count as being a "natural born citizen'.

I am ineligible to become president, because even though my father was American and I had a US passport since birth, I was born outside of the US without any military cover. If indeed Obama had been born in Kenya, he would have been treated the same way.

Racism has nothing to do with it, and you should be ashamed of yourself trying to perpetuate that myth.



Veni Vidi Castratavi Illegitimos
User currently offlinecharlienorth From United States of America, joined Jun 2006, 1119 posts, RR: 5
Reply 111, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 13 hours ago) and read 3085 times:

Quoting flipdewaf (Reply 96):
The only thing more upsetting to some republicans than a black man in the white house is that maybe a woman wears the trousers!

What the hell kind of dumb shit statement is that???? Your are showing prejudice and ignorance with crap like that


User currently offlineflipdewaf From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2006, 1562 posts, RR: 1
Reply 112, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 12 hours ago) and read 3086 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting charlienorth (Reply 111):

Quoting flipdewaf (Reply 96):
The only thing more upsetting to some republicans than a black man in the white house is that maybe a woman wears the trousers!

What the hell kind of dumb shit statement is that???? Your are showing prejudice and ignorance with crap like that


LOL, it called taking the piss and it only makes I funnier to see people biting. Have I touched a nerve?

Fred


User currently offlinealoges From Germany, joined Jan 2006, 8680 posts, RR: 43
Reply 113, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 12 hours ago) and read 3091 times:

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 110):
I am ineligible to become president, because even though my father was American and I had a US passport since birth, I was born outside of the US without any military cover.

You might well be eligible: http://travel.state.gov/law/citizenship/citizenship_5199.html "Military cover" doesn't seem to be a requirement.

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 110):
Racism has nothing to do with it, and you should be ashamed of yourself trying to perpetuate that myth.

Because you say so or because the birthers and/or hardline Republicans never insulted Obama over his ethnicity?



Walk together, talk together all ye peoples of the earth. Then, and only then, shall ye have peace.
User currently offlineDreadnought From United States of America, joined Feb 2008, 8785 posts, RR: 24
Reply 114, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 11 hours ago) and read 3083 times:

Quoting aloges (Reply 113):
You might well be eligible: http://travel.state.gov/law/citizenship/citizenship_5199.html "Military cover" doesn't seem to be a requirement.

Citizenship in general has nothing to do with "Natural Born Citizen". Naturalized citizens can't become president. The office of President is the only one that has such a restriction.

"No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States."

Quoting aloges (Reply 113):
Because you say so or because the birthers and/or hardline Republicans never insulted Obama over his ethnicity?

Now you are trying to deflect. You said that the only reason McCain and Obama were being treated differently was because of racism.

Quoting aloges (Reply 109):
It was known and repeatedly proven that Barack Obama is a natural-born American. I dimly recall that McCain was born in the Panama Canal Zone, which wasn't an integral part of the US, but quite rightfully no noteworthy campaign called him a Panamanian over that. So the difference boiled down to race: the candidate with the black father couldn't possibly be a "real" American while the white one was cleared of such suspicions in the blink of an eye.

John McCain's overseas birth garnered a lot of "birtherism" itself. A couple of judges had to pass judgements, supported by a Solicitor General, and the US Senate passed a resolution recognizing him as Natural Born, based on the fact that his parents were military, citizens on assignment overseas, and worthy of special consideration.

Had Obama been born in Kenya, he would have had no such basis for an exception, not because of race, but because the US government did not send his parents there, as John McCain's parents were.



Veni Vidi Castratavi Illegitimos
User currently offlineStarAC17 From Canada, joined Aug 2003, 3354 posts, RR: 9
Reply 115, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 11 hours ago) and read 3083 times:

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 110):
No, the difference boiled down to McCain being born of 2 American parents on an overseas military base, which in the past the Courts have allowed to count as being a "natural born citizen'.

IIRC the requirements to be a natural born citizen is if you have an American parent even if overseas. McCain has a bigger case for this because his parents were on duty with the US military and would be in America if it weren't the case.

Quoting aloges (Reply 113):
Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 110):
I am ineligible to become president, because even though my father was American and I had a US passport since birth, I was born outside of the US without any military cover.

You might well be eligible: http://travel.state.gov/law/citizenship/citizenship_5199.html "Military cover" doesn't seem to be a requirement.

I agree there is a case to be made that you can run because your father happened to be overseas doesn't necessarily matter. I could see cases where an American has been re-located to another country while working for a US company and it could be argued that that child would have been born in America has the family not been required to relocate.

IIRC the main point of this is to prevent naturalized citizens from running for office and its something that I think should be repealed as I could make the argument that someone who paid their dues to come to America legally and takes the oath of citizenship after fulfilling the requirements should be able to hold the highest office. They well likely have more love for the US than someone who was born into the citizenship or they were kids when their family moved to the US and no nothing of where they were born. Yes this is a generalization and I am completely aware of it.



Engineers Rule The World!!!!!
User currently offlinealoges From Germany, joined Jan 2006, 8680 posts, RR: 43
Reply 116, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 11 hours ago) and read 3087 times:

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 114):
Citizenship in general has nothing to do with "Natural Born Citizen". Naturalized citizens can't become president. The office of President is the only one that has such a restriction.

Did you even read beyond the headline?   

Quote:
A child born abroad to two U.S. citizen parents acquires U.S. citizenship at birth
(...)
A child born abroad to one U.S. citizen parent and one alien parent acquires U.S. citizenship at birth
(...)

Seriously... it's right there!

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 114):
Now you are trying to deflect.

How so?

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 114):
You said that the only reason McCain and Obama were being treated differently was because of racism.

I said nothing of the kind. All I was talking about was the scrutiny that their eligibility for the presidency received. The fact that they were generally treated differently by their own supporters and those of their respective opponent is a pillar of democracy. So please: stop twisting my words.

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 114):
John McCain's overseas birth garnered a lot of "birtherism" itself.

Sources, please, and I do hope that you remember my previous acknowledgement:

Quoting aloges (Reply 109):
I dimly recall that McCain was born in the Panama Canal Zone, which wasn't an integral part of the US, but quite rightfully no noteworthy campaign called him a Panamanian over that.

Whose citizenship status was kept prominently in the news for months? Obama's or McCain's? The simple truth is that both were cleared by the relevant authorities and made it on the ballots, but only one was pestered endlessly.

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 114):
Had Obama been born in Kenya, he would have had no such basis for an exception, not because of race, but because the US government did not send his parents there, as John McCain's parents were.

IIRC, Obama's mother met the applicable requirements that were in place at the time, so she would have passed her American citizenship on to his son at the time of his birth.

Anyway, this has very little to do with the topic of this thread, so I'll leave it at that with one final comment:

He's Pissed: Bill O'Reilly Says Obama Won Because, "The White Establishment Is Now The Minority"

If that is no indication of deep-rooted racism, I don't know what is.



Walk together, talk together all ye peoples of the earth. Then, and only then, shall ye have peace.
User currently offlinePu From Sweden, joined Dec 2011, 695 posts, RR: 13
Reply 117, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 10 hours ago) and read 3089 times:

Quoting StarAC17 (Reply 108):
you and every other American are paying for it anyways when that person goes to the ER.

Why doesn't the crowd who thinks America has healthcare capitalism right now get this point?

America largely already has "socialised medicine," that's why insurance rates are so high!

........... its just delivered at a vastly inefficient cost because insurance company profits are funded as well as the price of service. Med insurance costs so much because Americans pay for healthcare-delivered-at-the-ER (and insurer profits) instead of rationalising both payment & delivery of medical services as done in the rest of the first world!




Pu


User currently offlineStarAC17 From Canada, joined Aug 2003, 3354 posts, RR: 9
Reply 118, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 7 hours ago) and read 3084 times:

Quoting Pu (Reply 117):
........... its just delivered at a vastly inefficient cost because insurance company profits are funded as well as the price of service.

That is the biggest reason healthcare in the US is more expensive than other first world countries that spend about half the cost and get better aggregate results. Its because the insurance companies like all corporations their goal is to make money over providing care.

Saying all of that, the ACA is a very good idea because it implements some of the things that make healthcare affordable and accessible which people like. Such as not dumping people for a pre-existing condition but to afford that the mandate is required to be able to fund the system.

What I would like insurance companies to do is mandate annual physicals with a GP that they will pay for so that if someone is getting health problems that can become very expensive but if discovered early the treatment becomes far cheaper. I think people in the US even if insured are afraid to make claims on their health insurance to get a check up and that is part of the problem and not the solution.

Example being an annual blood test will tell a person that their blood sugar is creeping up and they can work with their GP to mitigate this before it gets even close to diabetes.

I reckon people will visit their doctor more regularly if there is no consequence for that, also insurance companies should allow people to pick their own doctor.



Engineers Rule The World!!!!!
User currently offlineMaverick623 From United States of America, joined Nov 2006, 5562 posts, RR: 6
Reply 119, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week ago) and read 3080 times:

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 110):
I am ineligible to become president, because even though my father was American and I had a US passport since birth, I was born outside of the US without any military cover.

If you are eligible for citizenship at birth, you are a natural-born citizen. Military or other official "cover" is not required.

Since you claim to have acquired a passport at birth, you were a citizen at birth... which makes you natural-born.



"PHX is Phoenix, PDX is the other city" -777Way
User currently offlineDreadnought From United States of America, joined Feb 2008, 8785 posts, RR: 24
Reply 120, posted (1 year 8 months 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 3080 times:

Quoting Maverick623 (Reply 119):
If you are eligible for citizenship at birth, you are a natural-born citizen. Military or other official "cover" is not required.

Since you claim to have acquired a passport at birth, you were a citizen at birth... which makes you natural-born.

First of all, the Supreme Court has never clearly decided this issue.

The U.S. State Department's Foreign Affairs Manual states that "it has never been determined definitively by a court whether a person who acquired U.S. citizenship by birth abroad to U.S. citizens is a natural-born citizen. (7 FAM §1131.6–2, Eligibility for Presidency.) In Rogers v. Bellei the Supreme Court only ruled that "children born abroad of Americans are not citizens within the citizenship clause of the 14th Amendment", and didn't elaborate on the natural-born status.

The US Senate had to intervene in 2008 in order to let McCain run for president, passing a resolution recognizing him as natural-born.

So it's not so simple as you put it.



Veni Vidi Castratavi Illegitimos
User currently offlinePHX787 From Japan, joined Mar 2012, 7167 posts, RR: 17
Reply 121, posted (1 year 8 months 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 3078 times:

Guys, this has turned into a huge debate about what the legality of citizenship is. If you want to keep this thread open, let's stay on topic....and stay civil


One of the FB admins for PHX Spotters. "Zach the Expat!"
User currently offlinebjorn14 From Norway, joined Feb 2010, 3381 posts, RR: 2
Reply 122, posted (1 year 8 months 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 3079 times:

Quoting StarAC17 (Reply 108):
if that company has more than 50 full time employees.

And now F/T is classed as 29 hours...the new Obama math.

Quoting aloges (Reply 109):
I dimly recall that McCain was born in the Panama Canal Zone, which wasn't an integral part of the US,

He wasn't even born in the PCZ, he was born at the local hospital in ONX about 1.5k fron the Zone.

Quoting StarAC17 (Reply 115):
I could make the argument that someone who paid their dues to come to America legally

The Founders saw it differently, They wanted no dual allegiances, no foreign influence.

Quoting aloges (Reply 116):
Seriously... it's right there!

Citizenship doesn't mean natural born.

Quoting aloges (Reply 116):
The simple truth is that both were cleared by the relevant authorities

What authorities?

Quoting Maverick623 (Reply 119):
Since you claim to have acquired a passport at birth, you were a citizen at birth... which makes you natural-born.

Natural-born means you have no other option for citizenship. You can't obtain another citizenship via jus soli or jus sanguis.



"I want to know the voice of God the rest is just details" --A. Einstein
User currently offlineMir From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 21482 posts, RR: 56
Reply 123, posted (1 year 8 months 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 3078 times:

Quoting bjorn14 (Reply 122):
Natural-born means you have no other option for citizenship. You can't obtain another citizenship via jus soli or jus sanguis.

If that's true, then Michelle Bachmann should not have been running for president. But she was. So I'm not sure that's really correct.

-Mir



7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
User currently offlinebjorn14 From Norway, joined Feb 2010, 3381 posts, RR: 2
Reply 124, posted (1 year 8 months 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 3078 times:

Quoting Mir (Reply 123):
If that's true, then Michelle Bachmann should not have been running for president. But she was. So I'm not sure that's really correct.

She was natural born she acquired her Swiss citizenship through her husband which she has renounced.



"I want to know the voice of God the rest is just details" --A. Einstein
User currently offlineGeezer From United States of America, joined Aug 2010, 1479 posts, RR: 2
Reply 125, posted (1 year 7 months 3 weeks 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 2671 times:

Post-Election Stock Market Tanking + Layoffs

Excuse me ! See that ? That's what this discussion is SUPPOSED to be about. This is NOT a "how to" about determining citizenship.

Now........back "on topic".........I was in a store today in Terre Haute; it's a place where I go every now and then.......Hobby Lobby;....the man who is the founder and CEO of "Hobby Lobby", Mr. David Green, had written an "open letter" to call the attention of the public to the effect Obama's "unaffordable health care law" will have starting next year, on small businesses. They were giving copies to anyone interested in reading it, so I picked up a copy and brought it home with me; It's very interesting............I suggest anyone interested in the U.S. economy should read it.

BTW, before you start posting, "who cares about Hobby Lobby, I don't even go there" replies, let me remind you that Hobby Lobby is just ONE of hundreds of thousands of small business that will be adversely affected by this ridiculous law. Unless you are living in Antarctica under an ice berg, YOU"RE going to be affected by it also.


By David Green, the founder and CEO of Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc.

When my family and I started our company 40 years ago, we were working out of a garage on a $600 bank loan, assembling miniature picture frames. Our first retail store wasn't much bigger than most people's living rooms, but we had faith that we would succeed if we lived and worked according to God's word. From there, Hobby Lobby has become one of the nation's largest arts and crafts retailers, with more than 500 locations in 41 states. Our children grew up into fine business leaders, and today we run Hobby Lobby together, as a family.

We're Christians, and we run our business on Christian principles. I've always said that the first two goals of our business are (1) to run our business in harmony with God's laws, and (2) to focus on people more than money. And that's what we've tried to do. We close early so our
employees can see their families at night. We keep our stores closed on Sundays, one of the week's biggest shopping days, so that our workers and their families can enjoy a day of rest. We believe that it is by God's grace that Hobby Lobby has endured, and he has blessed us and our employees. We've not only added jobs in a weak economy, we've raised wages for the past four years in a row. Our full-time employees start at 80% above minimum wage.

But now, our government threatens to change all of that. A new government healthcare mandate says that our family business MUST provide what I believe are abortion-causing drugs as part of our health insurance. Being Christians, we don't pay for drugs that might cause abortions, which means that we don't cover emergency contraception, the morning-after pill or the week-after pill.
We believe doing so might end a life after the moment of
conception, something that is contrary to our most important beliefs. It goes against the Biblical principles on which we have run this company since day one. If we refuse to comply, we could face $1.3 million PER DAY in
government fines.

Our government threatens to fine job creators in a bad economy. Our government threatens to fine a company that's raised wages four years running. Our government threatens to fine a family for running its business according to its beliefs. It's not right. I know people will
say we ought to follow the rules; that it's the same for everybody. But that's not true. The government has
exempted thousands of companies from this mandate, for reasons of convenience or cost. But it won't exempt them for reasons of religious belief.

So, Hobby Lobby and my family are forced to make a choice. With great reluctance, we filed a lawsuit today, represented by the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, asking a federal court to stop this mandate before it hurts our business. We don't like to go running into court, but we no longer have a choice. We believe people are
more important than the bottom line and that honoring God is more important than turning a profit.

My family has lived the American dream. We want to continue growing our company and providing great jobs for thousands of employees, but the government is going to make that much more difficult. The government is forcing us to choose between following our faith and following the law. I say that's a choice no American and no
American business should have to make. The government cannot force you to follow laws that go against
your fundamental religious belief. They have exempted thousands of companies but will not except Christian organizations including the Catholic church.

Sincerely,
David Green, CEO and Founder of Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc.


O.K., I realize the first thing we'll be hearing is, "I'm an atheist, so I don't even care"; may I remind you again, atheists need health care just like everyone else; this is NOT a discussion about religious beliefs, or the "lack" of them; this is about the impact this law will have on EVERYONE, regardless of your religious or non-religious beliefs, your race, sexual orientation, "or even if you "prefer to wear clothes or go naked". Everyone....( or damned near everyone ) works for "someone".......your employer; if your employer employs 500 (or more) employees, this is the law they must follow, ...........or........(or what?)

The "or what" is an awfully big "grey area"; I have no idea what Mr. Green will do; but I DO KNOW what I would do if I was in Mr. Green's "shoes", (and had Mr. Green's "funds") I would tell all of the employees that as of tomorrow at noon, Hobby Lobby would "cease to exist", and by 4 PM, I would be on my Gulfstream II, en-route to my "new home" in ************* ( and un-disclosed small country that keeps it's nose out of people's business)

So I'm wondering.........what would YOU do if YOU owned a company, and the "gub'mint" passed a law, made "certain" companies "abide" by that law, but let "certain other" companies be exempt from the law ?

Charley



Stupidity: Doing the same thing over and over and over again and expecting a different result; Albert Einstein
User currently offlinecmf From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 126, posted (1 year 7 months 3 weeks 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 2657 times:

Quoting Geezer (Reply 125):
and un-disclosed small country that keeps it's nose out of people's business

So you want government to stay out of companies but employers should be free to dictate the employees lives....


User currently offlinePu From Sweden, joined Dec 2011, 695 posts, RR: 13
Reply 127, posted (1 year 7 months 3 weeks 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 2652 times:



Quoting Geezer (Reply 125):

The government kills people legally in Hobby Lobby's home state of Oklahoma (and most others where it operates, especially Texas), the government has killed perhaps 100k Iraqis and Afghanis who never harmed America.........did Mr Green sue the government in those cases? What makes a few cells in an employee's uterus so much more important than Iraqi villagers?

....somehow he is now angry with the government because some of his own employees may choose to take the morning after pill?

Its hypocrisy hiding behind a flimsy appeal to religious freedom. Its the worst form of "Christianity" that shamefully uses religion for political purposes.


NO, HOBBY LOBBY HAS NO RIGHT TO DENY LEGAL MEDICAL TREATMENTS TO ITS EMPLOYEES.



Pu

[Edited 2012-11-30 20:33:12]

User currently offlineGeezer From United States of America, joined Aug 2010, 1479 posts, RR: 2
Reply 128, posted (1 year 7 months 3 weeks 2 days 5 hours ago) and read 2638 times:

Quoting cmf (Reply 126):
So you want government to stay out of companies but employers should be free to dictate the employees lives....

As for......"So you want government to stay out of companies".........Absolutely, positively !
That is just exactly what I want ! (And I'll tell you WHY I want it)
A "business" is an entity which exists so that it can make a profit, the investors/ owners can make a profit, and in so doing, will be able to provide income to their workers, (which can only happen IF they make a profit)
"Government" on the other hand, doesn't know HOW to make a profit, they never have known, never will know, and don't even CARE to know ! (Because THEY can "create" money ! They can also "rob you of your money" (which they have been doing now for a very long time, but they always seem to want MORE !)

The fact that you even asked that question, indicates to me that YOU think "government" is "highly skilled" at "managing businesses", "programs", etc. etc. etc. Please point out a few "businesses" or "programs" that the federal government has EVER managed, that didn't go bankrupt, or end up as a giant BOONDOGGEL ?

The federal government can do precisely ONE THING, that a private company, (or a corporation) can't do; it can pass a law, which imposes a tax, which FORCES the entity which must PAY that tax, to pay it or go to jail ! I assume YOU may think that's a grand idea ?

As for the second part of your sentence........"employers should be free to dictate the employees lives"....

Let's see now.......between 1950 and 1997, I worked for a "hell of a lot" of employers, from Armco Steel, Aeronca Aircraft, 3 or 4 different sheet metal contractors, Texaco, Inc. and about 500 different trucking companies "here and there", and I don't recall ANY ONE OF THEM ever attempting to "dictate my life" ! Maybe you can clarify exactly what you mean by "dictating employee's lives" ?

While you're wording your clarification, let me just guess............I'll bet you mean when I hired on at Armco Steel, and they told me........everyone starts out on "labor reserve"; "you come to work, if we have work, you work, if we don't, you don't" !
And even if you DO work, it's gonna be a lousy job, the pay is s**t, and it's hot, dirty, and seldom "fun". Is that what you mean by "dictating employee's lives" ? Do you think maybe they shoulda started me out as an "operator" on the hot-strip mill, (which paid like $20 / hr (back in 1951) Is that what you think they shoulda done ? I'm really interested to hear more about how these companies (employers), "dictating people's lives" ?

Charley



Stupidity: Doing the same thing over and over and over again and expecting a different result; Albert Einstein
User currently offlinecws818 From United States of America, joined Aug 2008, 1176 posts, RR: 2
Reply 129, posted (1 year 7 months 3 weeks 2 days 4 hours ago) and read 2637 times:

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 90):
Quoting Mir (Reply 69):
Perfectly solvent insurance companies refuse to cover certain procedures all the time.

Usually it's just a procedure that is either voluntary, such as a breast enhancement procedure.

How do you know that? Are you sure?



volgende halte...Station Hollands Spoor
User currently offlineGeezer From United States of America, joined Aug 2010, 1479 posts, RR: 2
Reply 130, posted (1 year 7 months 3 weeks 2 days 4 hours ago) and read 2632 times:

Quoting Pu (Reply 127):
The government kills people legally in Hobby Lobby's home state of Oklahoma (and most others where it operates, especially Texas), the government has killed perhaps 100k Iraqis and Afghanis who never harmed America.........did Mr Green sue the government in those cases? What makes a few cells in an employee's uterus so much more important than Iraqi villagers?

Let me get this straight........."the government kills people legally in Oklahoma (and Texas)" ; and what exactly does "100K of Iraqis and Afghanis, (who never "harmed" America).......have to do with ANYTHING being discussed on this thread ?
And PLEASE, explain for all to hear.......why on earth would Mr. Green want to sue the government because YOU say, all of this happened........I think you have about 19 things (none of which have anything what-so-ever to do with each other) all hopelessly mixed up here !

And the connection between "cells in employee's uterus" and "Iraqi villagers" is ? Whew !

Quoting Pu (Reply 127):
....somehow he is now angry with the government because some of his own employees may choose to take the morning after pill?

Do we perhaps have a "language barrier" by chance ? You better read what Mr. Green said again; he is NOT angry because ANYONE, (employee or otherwise), "chooses" to take a "morning after" pill; (if they "choose" to commit murder, he just doesn't want to be a "party to it" ! ) ( which I'm sure some would argue that he was, if he were to PAY for such a pill)

Quoting Pu (Reply 127):
Its hypocrisy hiding behind a flimsy appeal to religious freedom. Its the worst form of "Christianity" that shamefully uses religion for political purposes.

I'm not even going to attempt to address that last quote; what I am going to do is, I'm going to print it out, and placed it in my file of "most ridiculous statements of 2012", (where it will reside until 2013), when I will then review all such ridiculous statements, in order to choose "the most ridiculous statement of 2012", and award the "author" a suitable prize.


Charley

[Edited 2012-11-30 22:34:09]


Stupidity: Doing the same thing over and over and over again and expecting a different result; Albert Einstein
User currently offlineFlyDeltaJets From United States of America, joined Feb 2006, 1843 posts, RR: 2
Reply 131, posted (1 year 7 months 3 weeks 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 2600 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Geezer (Reply 125):
We keep our stores closed on Sundays, one of the week's biggest shopping days, so that our workers and their families can enjoy a day of rest.

It's a very nice gesture but it doesnt make good business sense. I think that he could help his business by not letting the busiest buisness day go un tapped.

Also because he believes in one thing (referring to his stance on birth control) it doesn't mean that he should basically force his employees to go along with it. I say force because so long as they are his employees (I understand they have the choice of continuing to work there) they would be bound to his view on what he feels is ethical. Just as I dont have the right to tell him what he should believe he shouldn't have the same power either.



The only valid opinions are those based in facts
User currently offlinePHX787 From Japan, joined Mar 2012, 7167 posts, RR: 17
Reply 132, posted (1 year 7 months 3 weeks 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 2569 times:

Quoting cws818 (Reply 129):
How do you know that? Are you sure?

I have relatives who work for the insurance companies, and I also have some experience with surgeries before.
A relative of mine wanted a nose job. Since it was a non-essential surgery, it wasn't covered under her insurance.



One of the FB admins for PHX Spotters. "Zach the Expat!"
User currently offlineseb146 From United States of America, joined Nov 1999, 11511 posts, RR: 15
Reply 133, posted (1 year 7 months 3 weeks 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 2540 times:

Quoting jpetekyxmd80 (Reply 2):
he hasn't hindered the stock market, it has soared during his term.

The market tanked with little to no regulation under Bush, but that was Obama's fault, somehow. Yet, the market made a come back with regulations under Obama and Wall Street is doing horribly, according to right-wing media.

Quoting PlanesNTrains (Reply 14):
No one will make enough to live on, so dependence on govt support will continue.

Except that has been going on for decades. This is not soley on Obama.



Life in the wall is a drag.
User currently offlinecmf From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 134, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 6 days 16 hours ago) and read 2460 times:

Quoting Geezer (Reply 128):
As for......"So you want government to stay out of companies".........Absolutely, positively !
That is just exactly what I want ! (And I'll tell you WHY I want it)

Then you have not read history. Look back at history. It wasn't very good when government left companies (mostly) alone.
No-one who understands business want to go back to those days.

Quoting Geezer (Reply 128):
A "business" is an entity which exists so that it can make a profit, the investors/ owners can make a profit, and in so doing, will be able to provide income to their workers, (which can only happen IF they make a profit)

Making profit is great. Making profit because you make other people carry the cost isn't. None of that is the issue at hand though. The issue at hand is what should employers be allowed to dictate about employees private life just because they provide what is used for payment.



Quoting Geezer (Reply 128):
The fact that you even asked that question, indicates to me that YOU think "government" is "highly skilled" at "managing businesses", "programs", etc. etc. etc. Please point out a few "businesses" or "programs" that the federal government has EVER managed, that didn't go bankrupt, or end up as a giant BOONDOGGEL ?

I think private business and government are as skilled as they are alowed to be by their owners. having been involved in the M&A teams of several companies I have looked at a ridiculous number of companies inner workings. I have poor news for you. Most private businesses are not that great either.

I do not have much knowledge about US federal government strives in managing businesses. I know of well run government owned businesses in other countries. PANHAM likes to point out FRAPORT.

Again, the way you write, and make claims about what I think, is a reflection of how you look at things with colored glasses. Most importantly, it is not related to the subject at hand.

Quoting Geezer (Reply 128):
I assume YOU may think that's a grand idea ?

Yes, I think it is a great idea that there is something controlling companies. Talk to any CEO and they will say the same.

Quoting Geezer (Reply 128):
Maybe you can clarify exactly what you mean by "dictating employee's lives" ?

Have you forgotten what the CEO of Hobby Lobby Stores wrote? They want to, indirectly, control the use of abortion pills.


User currently offlineiowaman From United States of America, joined May 2004, 4363 posts, RR: 6
Reply 135, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 2438 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
FORUM MODERATOR

I feel we all can agree this thread has ran its course and is now a back and forth argument and off-topic discussion. It is probably best to archive this thread.


Next flights: WN DSM-LAS-PHX, US PHX-SJD. Return: US SJD-PHX, WN PHX-MDW-DSM
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Looking To Invest In The Stock Market. Advice? posted Sun Aug 22 2010 13:08:26 by Yazoo
The Stock Market posted Fri Nov 14 2008 06:42:44 by DocLightning
Time To Invest In The Stock Market? posted Tue Oct 7 2008 16:59:41 by BristolFlyer
Post A Pic Of You Taking A Pic! posted Sat Oct 6 2007 00:42:06 by FXramper
Bad Day For The Stock Market Ahead... posted Tue Feb 27 2007 15:36:35 by Jaws707
Are We Heading For A Stock Market Crash? posted Fri Jul 7 2006 14:48:46 by Bmacleod
Stock Market Investors Are Ignorant Schmucks posted Tue Apr 13 2004 17:26:52 by PROSA
Let's Play The Stock Market! posted Wed Feb 25 2004 12:52:02 by CFIcraigAPA
Anyone Here Wanna Weigh In On The Stock Market? posted Sat Nov 15 2003 16:24:43 by UN_B732
Angry Stock Market Rant posted Fri Apr 26 2002 22:22:25 by PROSA