Misinformation

[Mott the Hoople]

I was hanging out with my friend the other night and he tells me that beginning in 2013 we are going to be mandated to pay our employees health insurance. And I'm like, what? No, we're not. He insists we are and it's one of the reasons he really hates Obama blah blah blah.

So of course I looked it up because I knew it was wrong, and I find:

the Affordable
Care Act requires large employers to pay a shared
responsibility fee only if they don’t provide affordable
coverage and taxpayers are supporting the cost of health
insurance for their workers through premium tax credits
for middle to low income families.
• The law specifically exempts all firms that have fewer
than 50 employees – 96 percent of all firms in the United
States or 5.8 million out of 6 million total firms – from
any employer responsibility requirements.


In fact, for small businesses who pay 50% or more of their employees premiums, we get tax credits! It's actually good for a lot of us. It's either good for you or it does not affect you at all unless you employ over 50 people - which is 4% of American businesses.

I emailed it to him. I mean I like this guy. But how can you be so stupid as to just listen to some right wing horseshit you heard somewhere? this is your business and you don't know? I read all this stuff that comes out to see what we can take advantage of. But so many people, and I mean educated people with money, are just clueless. They are just victims to whatever horseshit someone tells them. It really amazes me.

You're assuming that they want to hear the truth.

 

[cancel2 2022]

You're assuming that they want to hear the truth.

I do think there is something in what said about some Americans not wanting universal healthcare because they think it will benefit minorities.

 

[cawacko]

Why has the manufacturing sector disappeared over the years?

Two words: Corporate Greed

Isn't what has happened to manufactoring the basic definition of capitalism though which is about finding/using the most efficient allocation of resources?

 

[cancel2 2022]

You're right. If it were up to me, America would have 0% corporate tax rates! Income wouldn't be taxed at all, only consumerism.

I guess that's where I am very different from you, I want corporations to do well and prosper, because when that happens, we all seem to do well and prosper as a result. Seems like, the more corporations struggle to keep the doors open, and have to shut down factory after factory, it's not working out too well for the folks. We can look back to our heyday in manufacturing/production, and see that people of that time did pretty good, they started the Baby Boom generation, as a matter of fact. Built an interstate system across the country, bought new cars every three years, sent men to the moon... We had a pretty good little run there, while corporations prospered and flags flew high.

We have slowly traveled down this liberal road to more and more corporate regulation and taxation, more 'tax credits' and 'free money ideas' and we've endorsed unions and their ability to twist arms and get more and more opulent benefit packages, year after year, for their members. We've watched our entire manufacturing sector disappear in the process, and now we wonder why? Your 'solution' is to heap yet MORE burden and liability on the back of the corporation, who you basically see as 'evil' in the scheme of things, because you are a socialist.

How would that pay for your military?

 

[cawacko]

I do think there is something in what said about some Americans not wanting universal healthcare because they think it will benefit minorities.

I don't follow that argument. Minorities can get health care now the same as any white person. For the poor there is Medicaid. For those with money they can purchase it on their own.

 

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

Why has the manufacturing sector disappeared over the years?

Two words: Corporate Greed

Nonsense. Greed is the same as it's always been, it doesn't change. What worked before, should still work now, because the same amount of greed existed then as now. People aren't inherently more greedy this year than last year, are they? In any event, "greed" as it relates to corporations, is nothing for us to concern ourselves with, that's the wonderful thing about capitalism.

You see, a greedy corporate capitalist, will eventually get what they deserve. It might come in the form of prison or fines, but it may also come from consumer rejection. Most capitalists, whether greedy or not, depend on the consumer and their acceptance. Consumers don't tend to like "greed" on the part of their corporate capitalists, and will find other products and services, by people who are less "greedy" and more fair to the consumer. In any event, either way, the fate of the greedy corporate capitalist is almost certainly doomed.

No, when it comes to American manufacturing, we have to look at labor unions, and how they have driven the cost of US production to a level that is no longer attractive to the capitalist. It's not the "greed" of the capitalist, he is merely being a capitalist. It is the "greed" of the labor unions, which has caused the manufacturing sector to vanish.

The very concept of thinking "corporate greed" is responsible, flies in the face of logic itself. Why does a rich corporation need to be MORE greedy? To buy more private corporate jets? Where are they going to fly them to? More yachts? Where are they going to park them? A bigger home? To go with the four they already have? What in the hell is the motivation for a rich corporate capitalist to be MORE greedy? Especially since being a "greedy capitalist" is such a losing proposition!

 

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

How would that pay for your military?

The National Sales Tax would fund the military at current levels, along with everything else. There is no difference in amount of money, it's the difference in how it is collected. I prefer a system where tax is collected at the consumption level, since we are a consumer-based society. Meaning, we consume a lot more than we make. You prefer to tax incomes, which is fine, so long as you have people with jobs earning incomes. That's the real bugaboo. But as we clearly see and understand, even when people don't have jobs, they still consume.... right?

 

[Banned]

"So now, an employee, who by no fault of their own, could one day be told by the firm they have worked at for years that the company has just decided to no longer cover his/her health benefits and that she/he will now have to purchase an individual health plan from a private health insurance company.


Sounds great, doesn’t it?"

And that is different from how it is now in what way?
More and more employers are dropping health care coverage.

 

[cancel2 2022]

The National Sales Tax would fund the military at current levels, along with everything else. There is no difference in amount of money, it's the difference in how it is collected. I prefer a system where tax is collected at the consumption level, since we are a consumer-based society. Meaning, we consume a lot more than we make. You prefer to tax incomes, which is fine, so long as you have people with jobs earning incomes. That's the real bugaboo. But as we clearly see and understand, even when people don't have jobs, they still consume.... right?

So the rich and poor would pay exactly the same taxes? Which naturally benefits the rich immensely, that is more or less what happens in most third world countries.

 

[Banned]

Isn't what has happened to manufactoring the basic definition of capitalism though which is about finding/using the most efficient allocation of resources?

And those cheaper resources just happened to be in China, Mexico, India, etc.

 

[cawacko]

And those cheaper resources just happened to be in China, Mexico, India, etc.

Yes. And?

 

[cancel2 2022]

Yes. And?

The richer members of society think that there are immune from jobs migration to the East, until one day they wake up and find they have gone as well.

 

[cawacko]

The richer members of society think that there are immune from jobs migration to the East, until one day they wake up and find they have gone as well.

There have been white collar jobs that have been outshoreded as well. The point is look at the advances in our society, especially in technology. That is the future. I do not agree that it is because of greed we are not just a manufactoring based economy anymore.

 

[cancel2 2022]

There have been white collar jobs that have been outshoreded as well. The point is look at the advances in our society, especially in technology. That is the future. I do not agree that it is because of greed we are not just a manufactoring based economy anymore.

I am talking about technologically based jobs, both my sons are at universities in England studying computer science. There are a huge number of Chinese and Indian students doing science degrees now, I sure the same is true in the US.

 

[cawacko]

I am talking about technologically based jobs, both my sons are at universities in England studying computer science. There are a huge number of Chinese and Indian students doing science degrees now, I sure the same is true in the US.

No question. A large number of engineers in the Silicon Valley are Indian. Lots of talk in the U.S. about why we don't produce enough engineers.

 

[Don Quixote]

No question. A large number of engineers in the Silicon Valley are Indian. Lots of talk in the U.S. about why we don't produce enough engineers.

because too many us students are not willing to undergo the rigorous work required for an engineering degree or any other science degree or take the preparatory courses in high school

 

[apple0154]

And now... what are we all paying for? Well, we are paying endless sums of our own money, and our children and grandchildren's money, so that whenever anyone out there gets a hangnail, or neurotically believes they have brain tumors, they can run down to the local medical facility and occupy hours and hours of time of medical professionals, who are paid to listen. Since most medical schooling is expensive, this is not cheap... but we have this endless supply of free money to take care of that, right?

The problem is two fold. First, ObamaCare is a START on the road to one payer/government/universal health care. The reason ObamaCare is such a hodge-podge is he started out trying to get the Repubs on board. Certain clauses/concessions were already in the bill before the Dems were forced to eject the Repubs from further talks similar to insisting unruly children leave the classroom and stand in the hall. Also, by the Repubs not wanting any type of medical coverage change any ideas they put forward were designed to not work properly. Why would they submit good ideas to help a project succeed when they are against the project? Surely that is easy enough to understand.

Second, people covered by government health care do not "run down to the local medical facility and occupy hours and hours of time of medical professionals." That is how "pay or suffer" systems operate. Under the "pay or suffer" system if one has heartburn and sufficient funds they can make an appointment with a high priced heart surgeon/specialist. And the person who does require a heart specialist due to heart disease (not heartburn from eating too much pepperoni) can't afford to see a heart specialist because he/she is busy with the pepperoni guy. Considering the specialist will receive their fee either way I'm sure they prefer sitting in their office having a chat rather than being in the operating room.

Under government plans a person would first be examined by a general practitioner/family doctor. If the doctor can not diagnose the problem or believes the heart is the problem he then refers the patient to a heart specialist. That way the specialist is not tied up with people running down to the local medical facility and occupying hours and hours of their time due to having attended an Italian wedding. The specialist gets to see patients and patients get to see a specialist, financial resources notwithstanding. Basic logic and common sense.

Now, as for the grandchildren paying for this I suppose Billy and Suzy might have preferred their grandfather and grandmother had met their maker sooner rather than later. Considering their grandparents lived, say, 50 or more years it's likely they are/were set in their ways and the odds are they leaned conservative. Why would they appreciate having kept someone alive who only offered tired, worn out ideas (opinions)? If that's your argument you may have a case.

/////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////

Well I should think it would be good for ALL of us, not just a lot? Free money? Who doesn't benefit from free money?

But you know, as much as I do like free money, my pragmatic mind can't help but wonder where it comes from. Money doesn't grow on trees, unless Washington DC has some kind of special tree we don't know about. Therefore, in order to give away free money, there has to be a source. Now, when you say "it doesn't effect you," I suppose you mean, if you aren't potentially one of the sources of this free cash? Because, if you are, I certainly think it might effect you a little, to have to provide it.

Of course, there are still those entities who employ over 50 people, (aka: corporations). Perhaps they are the source of all this free money? But they don't have magic money trees either, the money has to come from somewhere. In the end, the consumer is the source of the free money, there is no other ultimate way to obtain it. We can tax corporations, or institute mandates all day long, at the end of the day, the consumer is who will ultimately be the source of all this free money.

And now... what are we all paying for? Well, we are paying endless sums of our own money, and our children and grandchildren's money, so that whenever anyone out there gets a hangnail, or neurotically believes they have brain tumors, they can run down to the local medical facility and occupy hours and hours of time of medical professionals, who are paid to listen. Since most medical schooling is expensive, this is not cheap... but we have this endless supply of free money to take care of that, right?

 

[Guns Guns Guns]

The National Sales Tax would fund the military at current levels, along with everything else.

Dix neglected to offer any evidence to support his contention that a "National Sales Tax would fund the military at current levels, along with everything else".

You prefer to tax incomes, which is fine, so long as you have people with jobs earning incomes. That's the real bugaboo. But as we clearly see and understand, even when people don't have jobs, they still consume.... right?

So you want to force the people laid off as a result of corporate greed to pay higher taxes on food, shelter, medical care, and other necessities of life and cut their jobless benefits?

 

[Banned]

The richer members of society think that there are immune from jobs migration to the East, until one day they wake up and find they have gone as well.

Or the Chinese are buying their businesses and evicting them as I see it happeneing on the current path.

 

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

So the rich and poor would pay exactly the same taxes? Which naturally benefits the rich immensely, that is more or less what happens in most third world countries.

Sorry, but no. How can you conclude that tax on consumption of a wealthy person would be remotely similar to that of a poor person, is beyond me. Poor people, last I checked, didn't buy yacht and G5s. They spend $1,500 on a used Taurus instead of $150k on a Mercedes. So the actual taxes paid, would me much much greater for a rich person, who can spend an endless supply of wealth, as opposed to folks on a budget. We can even set it up where the first so many thousand you spend, for basic needs, is non-taxable. This way, the poorest of the poor, the ones who fall below this threshold, wouldn't pay any tax at all.

I don't know what happens in most third-world countries, and I wouldn't recommend a consumption tax for them, since they aren't a consumption-driven society, like ours.