Democrats continue to decimate the "little guy" in favor of their GREED

[tooAlive]

Polk, seriously man. You have no argument.

The ACA will impose hefty penalties on businesses. That leaves them unable to expand, and will force them to cut hours to avoid said penalties.

There's no possible way you can defend this. Get your head out of the clouds and admit your party made a mistake.

 

[bripat9643]

That argument, in and of itself, is nonsense. If we repealed every regulation or statute that makes hiring workers more expensive at the margin, there goes any sort of workplace safety rules, the minimum wage, overtime, etc.

Nope. Only the government regulations would disappear.

 

[Polk]

That argument, in and of itself, is nonsense. If we repealed every regulation or statute that makes hiring workers more expensive at the margin, there goes any sort of workplace safety rules, the minimum wage, overtime, etc.

Nope. Only the government regulations would disappear.

Because we know business will police itself in the absence of regulation:

Garment factory fires: A "distinctly South Asian" tragedy | The Economist

 

[Amelia]

Any selection will have an arbitrary element to it. What substantive difference is there between someone 20 years, 364 days old, and someone 21 years old that justifies one being able to purchase alcohol, and the other not? The same argument exists for every regulation is existence. If we went off the standards you guys are proposing, there couldn't be any laws against child molestation (no age of consent) and toddlers could get a driver's license (no limit on driving age).

Ask the guy who doesn't get hired or has his schedule reduced to under 30 hours a week what the "substantive difference" is. We aren't talking about the age at which some privilege is granted. We are talking about imposing severe financial penalties on business. No one is going to avoid becoming another year older, but every business in the country will do what it can to avoid massive cost increases. That's what businesses do.

It's thinking like yours that are responsible for monstrosities like this. People don't become business owners by being stupid, but that's exactly what bureaucratic nightmares like ACA are based on.

Many of the firms who complained the penalties have realized that making the sorts of business changes you're saying they will costs more money than compliance.

Olive Garden, Red Lobster parent to announce it will hold off on health changes - CBS News

Interesting example. Lesson learned from that: Be careful not to publicize the changes you make in order to attempt to survive onerous governmental requirements.

 

[bripat9643]

Many of the firms who complained the penalties have realized that making the sorts of business changes you're saying they will costs more money than compliance.

Olive Garden, Red Lobster parent to announce it will hold off on health changes - CBS News

And many of them haven't "realized" that.

 

[bripat9643]

That argument, in and of itself, is nonsense. If we repealed every regulation or statute that makes hiring workers more expensive at the margin, there goes any sort of workplace safety rules, the minimum wage, overtime, etc.

Nope. Only the government regulations would disappear.

Because we know business will police itself in the absence of regulation:

Garment factory fires: A "distinctly South Asian" tragedy | The Economist

In this country insurance companies police businesses for safety because they don't like paying out on hundred million dollar claims.

 

[Polk]

Ask the guy who doesn't get hired or has his schedule reduced to under 30 hours a week what the "substantive difference" is. We aren't talking about the age at which some privilege is granted. We are talking about imposing severe financial penalties on business. No one is going to avoid becoming another year older, but every business in the country will do what it can to avoid massive cost increases. That's what businesses do.

It's thinking like yours that are responsible for monstrosities like this. People don't become business owners by being stupid, but that's exactly what bureaucratic nightmares like ACA are based on.

Many of the firms who complained the penalties have realized that making the sorts of business changes you're saying they will costs more money than compliance.

Olive Garden, Red Lobster parent to announce it will hold off on health changes - CBS News

Interesting example. Lesson learned from that: Be careful not to publicize the changes you make in order to attempt to survive onerous governmental requirements.

No, it shows that the requirements aren't particularly problematic. Look at the CEO of Papa John's moaning about the ACA. He's living in a mega-mansion from selling shitty pizza and whining about the eight cents the law will add to the cost of his product.

 

[Polk]

Nope. Only the government regulations would disappear.

Because we know business will police itself in the absence of regulation:

Garment factory fires: A "distinctly South Asian" tragedy | The Economist

In this country insurance companies police businesses for safety because they don't like paying out on hundred million dollar claims.

No, things like that don't happen in country because of workplace safety regulations. Before they existed, this sort of thing happened pretty frequently. Go pick up a history textbook and read about the Triangle Shirtwaist fire.

 

[bripat9643]

Because we know business will police itself in the absence of regulation:

Garment factory fires: A "distinctly South Asian" tragedy | The Economist

In this country insurance companies police businesses for safety because they don't like paying out on hundred million dollar claims.

No, things like that don't happen in country because of workplace safety regulations. Before they existed, this sort of thing happened pretty frequently. Go pick up a history textbook and read about the Triangle Shirtwaist fire.

You're sadly mistaken if you think OSHA enforces work place safety rules. I worked construction for 5 years and I never saw anyone from OSHA the entire time. However, I did see many insurance agents who came to check that the fire-proofing in the building was properly installed and that all the building codes were followed. They also checked to see that all the men were wearing hard hates and using the equipment properly,

 

[Polk]

OSHA is chronically understaffed, but that's something you support.

 

[bripat9643]

OSHA is chronically understaffed, but that's something you support.

In other words, it doesn't promote workplace safety. The insurance companies do.

 

[P@triot]

Health insurance tied to employment is retarded. Does the ACA even address this? I sure haven't heard that it does. Why in the world should health insurance be dictated by where you're employed or by how many hours you work and if you lose your job you also lose your health insurance? Dumb, dumb, dumb.

What is "dumb, dumb, dumb" is the fact that you think your health insurance has to be tied to your job . You can get your own health insurance any time you want, and you can keep it for life, regardless of your job.

 

[P@triot]

Like you give a shit about the little guy, whenever I see a conservative acting populist I start looking for the special interest angle and look-a-there, some low wage paying prick complaining about something.

Spoken like a true parasite dumbocrat.

Conservatives give a FUCK LOAD more about people than the left ever has or ever will. You want government to force others to take care of people so you don't have to.

Meanwhile, our side of the aisle is out there with our sleeves rolled up giving time and money to those who need it.

 

[LeftofLeft]

Like you give a shit about the little guy, whenever I see a conservative acting populist I start looking for the special interest angle and look-a-there, some low wage paying prick complaining about something.

Liberals only give a shit about the little guy as long as he is paying his union dues or donates heavily to the cause.

 

[P@triot]

Any selection will have an arbitrary element to it. What substantive difference is there between someone 20 years, 364 days old, and someone 21 years old that justifies one being able to purchase alcohol, and the other not? The same argument exists for every regulation is existence. If we went off the standards you guys are proposing, there couldn't be any laws against child molestation (no age of consent) and toddlers could get a driver's license (no limit on driving age).

Making laws against child molestation makes sense.

Non-business people making laws which fundamentally change how thousands of businesses make hiring decisions, making the choice to hire inherently more expensive during a time when hiring is already in crisis -- makes no sense at all.

That argument, in and of itself, is nonsense. If we repealed every regulation or statute that makes hiring workers more expensive at the margin, there goes any sort of workplace safety rules, the minimum wage, overtime, etc.

You compare someone pointing out the problem with Obamacare to people not wanting to have laws against child molestation, and you call other people's argument "nonsense"

Seriously, every thing you've stated is so nonsensical, it defies comprehension.

 

[P@triot]

Because we know business will police itself in the absence of regulation:

Garment factory fires: A "distinctly South Asian" tragedy | The Economist

Because we all know government will police itself when usurping the Constitution that is designed to restrain it :

Gendercide Watch: Stalin's Purges

 

[P@triot]

No, it shows that the requirements aren't particularly problematic. Look at the CEO of Papa John's moaning about the ACA. He's living in a mega-mansion from selling shitty pizza and whining about the eight cents the law will add to the cost of his product.

So to summarize, the CEO of Papa John's EARNED is "mega-mansion" and you're pissed off about that?

You dumbocrats are so ignorant, you actually believe that if he sells is "mega-mansion", he could pay for this unconstitutional monstrosity. If John Schnatter sold everything he ever owned, it would fund his ENTIRE company covering Obamacare for about a month.

It's astounding that you think like a 4 year. "He has millions - that will last forever if he just shared it". God almighty...

 

[Rozman]

Health insurance tied to employment is retarded. Does the ACA even address this? I sure haven't heard that it does. Why in the world should health insurance be dictated by where you're employed or by how many hours you work and if you lose your job you also lose your health insurance? Dumb, dumb, dumb.

If those who wrote the law didn't have their heads straight up their ass, they may have thought about this. Not that the other party's "ideas" have been any better.

What a fuckin' mess.

.

Big government at it's finest...
They created a 2,000 plus page clusterfuck.

 

[P@triot]

Lets take a look at just a few of Mr. Polk's absurd comments that scream hatred and envy for those that have been successful:

plenty of businesses already hire large numbers of "part-time" employees (giving them slightly less than needed to qualify as full-time), so they can offer competitive benefit packages on paper, but no one actually gets them in practice.

Because we know business will police itself in the absence of regulation:

Look at the CEO of Papa John's moaning about the ACA. He's living in a mega-mansion from selling shitty pizza and whining about the eight cents the law will add to the cost of his product.

So the trillion dollar question that the dumbocrats will never answer is: if all of these busineses are so evil, so greedy, and mistreat people so horribly, why not start your own business and hire workers for six-figures each, cadillac healthcare plans, profit sharing, and treat people with the highest levels of respect?

Think about it - since all of these other businesses are sooooooo "bad", all of the top talent will be dying to come work for you. You'll make BILLIONS and be the biggest, most wealthy company in the world, right?

Idiot liberal dumbocrats only cry and become parasites. They never become leaders who do and solve problems.

 

[Zoom-boing]

Health insurance tied to employment is retarded. Does the ACA even address this? I sure haven't heard that it does. Why in the world should health insurance be dictated by where you're employed or by how many hours you work and if you lose your job you also lose your health insurance? Dumb, dumb, dumb.

What is "dumb, dumb, dumb" is the fact that you think your health insurance has to be tied to your job . You can get your own health insurance any time you want, and you can keep it for life, regardless of your job.

Most full time jobs offer health insurance as part of their benefits package, which ties one's health insurance to their job. Most people who have health insurance have it through their job. When the job goes so does the insurance. That's what's dumb. It shouldn't be tied to employment at all. Are you suggesting that people should not take the insurance that's offered with a job but rather purchase something separately? If companies would give the employee that 'benefit' in money (increased salary), peachy. I've not heard of companies doing that.