Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
REALLY? You will need to explain that (I'll give you a chance before I just say you're wrong).
I own a business and the government doesn't subsidize a single PENNY of the health insurance we provide our employees.
Funny, my employees never seem to see it that way at all. They don't COUNT the funds I pay towards their health insurance as compensation.
In reality...it is a PERK that I provide because I can't hire the best people unless I offer them that benefit. Nothing PRESENTLY says I MUST though.
Since you feel it's THEIR MONEY, then every time my health insurance rates increase, that's the same as my employees getting a raise...right?
PS: Since ObamaCare was passed, those rates have increased a LOT faster and higher than they did before ObamaCare. I thought Obama said that it would make health insurance more affordable? IN fact, it's CALLED the Affordable Care Act isn't it? I've YET to see where the "affordable" part is?
First, feelings are irrelevant. Employer provided health insurance is not a perk. It is a part of an employees compensation paid on their behalf instead of wages paid directly to them.
I don't feel anything. I am dealing with reality. Employer provided Health insurance is compensation and yes everytime employee health insurance premiums increase and an employer spends more money of his employees compensation on healthcare instead of giving them higher wages.
I don't think you know enough for me to waste my time explaining the ACA bill. If you think that that the ACA is responsible for insurance preminum increases explain how.
First, feelings are irrelevant. Employer provided health insurance is not a perk. It is a part of an employees compensation paid on their behalf instead of wages paid directly to them.
I don't feel anything. I am dealing with reality. Employer provided Health insurance is compensation and yes everytime employee health insurance premiums increase and an employer spends more money of his employees compensation on healthcare instead of giving them higher wages.
I don't think you know enough for me to waste my time explaining the ACA bill. If you think that that the ACA is responsible for insurance preminum increases explain how.
We all have to pay extra so that the pool of money is there for those subsidized by the government.
Taxpayers have to foot those subsidies. You think the money grows on trees and "just appears out of nowhere" ?
I've gotten letters regarding my increased premiums and why. Both the cost of healthcare has risen and the pool of money had to be increased because of Obamacare expanded coverage.
Haven't you gotten those notices from your company ?
Preventative care is "free" but the cost of that care still has to be paid..via higher premiums.
You have government expanding healthcare. Who do you think will have to pay for that expanded coverage ? The cost was passed on to us in higher premiums.
And we're still in the early stages where only a few items of the ACA have kicked in. Just wait until 2014 when the full blown bill kicks into gear. The high risk pool has already spent 4 years of government money in 2 years and are asking for more.
Revealing Politics.com sent a cameraman out to meet women voters at Obama’s Colorado rally Wednesday, where he was introduced by the country’s most famous adult woman incapable of making a run to the CVS, Sandra Fluke.
Enjoy:
Political drones have their talking points, and they don't bother to actually think past them or analyze them.
Contraception is frequently a medical necessity. My sister had polycystic ovary syndrome, a medical condition. As hers was unrelated to weight (she was very thin) or diabetes (she did not have insulin issues) the best treatment was birth control pills to regulate her hormones.
If a man had a corresponding endocrine condition, his medication and treatment would be covered under insurance, so why shouldn't a woman's?
Critical thinking was removed from the schools years ago.
Give people just the bits and pieces because, as you can see, they cannot put them together and see the bigger picture.
You want government out of your bedroom yet you want government to pay for your contraceptives.
This thought has not occurred to any of these people ?
Healthcare-related tax subsidies will this year amount to nearly $350 billion annually. The federal share of this total, $265 billion, is more than the federal government paid for its share of Medicaid in 2009. Thus, ironically, the federal government spent more that year to subsidize private health insurance than it spent on public health insurance for those who have low incomes (although this no longer is true).
Health-related tax expenditures take many forms, but more than 90 percent of costs attributable to them relate to the tax exclusion for employer-provided health benefits. Because health benefits are not taxed the way they would be if the identical dollar amount were given to employees as income, this tax exclusion results not only in income tax revenue losses at the federal and state levels, but also payroll taxes for Medicare and Social Security. That is, in addition to not having to pay income taxes on compensation provided in the form of health benefits, employees also avoid having payroll taxes deducted on these same amounts. By comparison, other tax expenditures, such as the Schedule B deduction for households that have large health expenses relative to income, are minuscule.
Again. It appears that Democrats' operate under the theory that all money is the government's money and the Feds just decide to let you keep whatever amount they deem appropriate.
Tax deductions...tax credits....loopholes......all of it is irrelevant. Basically, all you've explained is a circular argument that proves what I just stated above.
Again. It appears that Democrats' operate under the theory that all money is the government's money and the Feds just decide to let you keep whatever amount they deem appropriate.
Tax deductions...tax credits....loopholes......all of it is irrelevant. Basically, all you've explained is a circular argument that proves what I just stated above.
Such a sickening ideology liberals dwell in.
On a similar note, didn't Andrea Mitchell make fun of Paul Ryan for indicating that rights do not come from government, but from God?
Neo-progs can't escape the clause in our DoI about rights coming not from government, but from our Creator, but it's entertaining to watch them inject red herrings such as "the founders were slaveowners", to somehow make the phrase illegitimate. Even atheists acknowledge the word "Creator" as being something greater than DC or even man. They are natural rights. It's also no surprise that the phrase "our Creator" have been completely skipped on multiple occasions when Obama recites the context.
What`s cheaper? The govt. paying for birth control or the govt. paying for decades of welfare benefits for the mother and who knows how many children? This is such an easy question that someone who voted for W or palin should be able to answer it correctly.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
