Liberal Business owners - a true story of what I get to deal with right now

[Article 15]

^ this is how you can tell right away when a person never once in his life had bottom line accountability for anything.

Wrong. It's how you keep things into perspective instead of buying into the doom and gloom hysteria.

To cover the $50k cost, on 55 employees, it's $20 bucks a paycheck. Versus:

unemployment.
bankruptcy.

Right because it's never a big deal to write a check on somebody elses account

Why not start cutting government spending be reducing all federal employees by $20/paycheck?

2.1MM*20*26= $1,092MM annually

Aren't you part of that tribe of clowns who are sneezing at $80 billion in tax revenue from the wealthy because it doesn't single handedly eliminate the deficit?

 

[Jarhead]

Here's the thing.

If you are an employee working in a high income job, your employer probably sponsors your health insurance to the tune of at least $10,000 a year. That is on top of your income. And you are not taxed for any of that $10,000 benefit. That's a tax free gift from Uncle Santa to you worth a box full of ObamaPhones.

Under ObamaCare, you are fucked. Because if your employer decides to no longer insure you, the MOST he will be fined is $2,000. That is a lot less than your current $10,000 health insurance benefit coming out of his pocket.

And chances are that your employer won't be fined a single cent since you are being paid more than 400 percent above poverty level and therefore won't qualify for a federal subsidy.


If you work for a business that does not pay the big bucks, and your employer does not insure you, you will qualify for a federal subsidy and your employer will be fined $2,000.


ObamaCare is a boon to big businesses that want to kill their smaller competitors. It's win/win for them.


.

Can you PLEASE tell me what "large employer" is referring to in the clauses that you posted...and WHY it refers specifically to "Large employers" if it is applicable to ALL employers?

The definition of a large employer is in the link I provided in post 187 in the same section to which I referred.

Basically, any employer with more than 50 full time employees (with some nits here and there) falls under the requirement to insure their employees. However, there are no penalties for not insuring their employees unless those employees use federal money to subsidize their health insurance which they buy on their own through the health exchanges.

Only someone who earns less than 400 percent above the poverty level qualifies for a federal health insurance subsidy.

So if an employer pays his employees more than 400 percent above poverty level, that employer will not be fined for not insuring his employees.

In addition, if an employer does not insure his employees, and some of them do qualify for a federal subsidy, the first 30 who qualify for a subsidy are not counted toward the penalties to be incurred.

So there are several ways it is possible that an employer with more than 50 employees can get away with not insuring his employees and not pay a single cent in penalties.


Nevertheless, the very idea that the government can require you to insure your employees is reprehensible and socialistic, and will continue to bend the cost curve upward.

.

Thanks.

Either way, it is going to get ugly.

 

[jillian]

2012 Poverty Guidelines for the
48 Contiguous States and the District of Columbia
Persons in
family/household Poverty guideline
1 $11,170
2 15,130
3 19,090
4 23,050
5 27,010
6 30,970
7 34,930
8 38,890
For families/households with more than 8 persons,
add $3,960 for each additional person.

So anyone making LESS than 400% of the above which means that in a 50 person company there's about a 100% chance to include someone in that category.

these are the numbers in real dollars...

it's 4x as you say.. although i'm sure saying 400% makes you feel it's somehow larger... however, there's also an "AND" in the requirement which is bolded below:

Free-Choice Vouchers": Employees who earn less than four times the federal poverty level (in 2011, $43,560 for an individual and $89,400 for a family of four) and whose share of the premium is between 8 percent and 9.5 percent of his or her household income, can choose to enroll in an exchange instead of the employer plan. The employer must issue the employee a "free-choice voucher" equal to the amount the employer would have paid under the employer's plan.

Health Policy Briefs

the chances of the employee choosing to buy an independent plan are pretty much nil.

 

[jillian]

Liberals being stupid people believe adding costs to a company's bottomline will stimulate them to hire more workers.

The evil liberals that passed this bill know better, they did this on purpose.

^ This!!

only if you need meds, too.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

it shouldnt be.

like say they make $25k each, which is pretty low unless we're talking fast food which is typically well over 50.......

thats 1 and 1/4 million in salaries we're juggling with.

50k is a drop in the dingaling tbh.

^ this is how you can tell right away when a person never once in his life had bottom line accountability for anything.

or more likely know that a family vacation for the type of person you're talking about costs $100,000

and they'll spend $1,000 on a family dinner

and $3,000 on a business dinner.

not to mention the fact that the extra expenses don't cost $50,000 in actual dollars because of concomitant tax deductions.

so i'd say that YOUR observations are the ones made by someone who never had bottom line accountability... at least not on any scale large enough to run a 50-person concern

You're all over the place and starting to spew.

Are you saying that every business owner is a rich person as you described above? It's from some Marxists comic book version of America.

I studiously avoid any discussion of myself or my business but I leave rather large hints and have mentioned, more than once, that I was the first analyst hired by someone who is now on Forbes 400 list and helped him grow his Capital Markets subsidiary. I did real estate tax shelters on an abacus and we raised capital from every brokerage house at the time on Wall Street.

I know bottom line -- and I know who doesn't

 

[GoneBezerk]

Shitbag....I have a BA in Economics and a MBA.

What are your credentials in this area?

So tell us how more costs and regulation on Joe Schmoe's business because of Obamacare motivates him to hire more workers and expand his business.

Your typical non-response will prove you are full of shit.

Liberals being stupid people believe adding costs to a company's bottomline will stimulate them to hire more workers.

The evil liberals that passed this bill know better, they did this on purpose.

^^^^^^

needs meds

 

[jillian]

^ this is how you can tell right away when a person never once in his life had bottom line accountability for anything.

or more likely know that a family vacation for the type of person you're talking about costs $100,000

and they'll spend $1,000 on a family dinner

and $3,000 on a business dinner.

not to mention the fact that the extra expenses don't cost $50,000 in actual dollars because of concomitant tax deductions.

so i'd say that YOUR observations are the ones made by someone who never had bottom line accountability... at least not on any scale large enough to run a 50-person concern

You're all over the place and starting to spew.

Are you saying that every business owner is a rich person as you described above? It's from some Marxists comic book version of America.

I studiously avoid any discussion of myself or my business but I leave rather large hints and have mentioned, more than once, that I was the first analyst hired by someone who is now on Forbes 400 list and helped him grow his Capital Markets subsidiary. I did real estate tax shelters on an abacus and we raised capital from every brokerage house at the time on Wall Street.

I know bottom line -- and I know who doesn't

that isn't spewing honey. it's reality.

do you think i'm wrong about the numbers I stated?

if you're a numbers guy, what do you think the actual, after-tax deduction, cost of $1,000 per year.

and do you see any drop in CEO compensation packages or golden parachutes?

you're not being honest if you say you do.

 

[jillian]

Shitbag....I have a BA in Economics and a MBA.

What are your credentials in this area?

So tell us how more costs and regulation on Joe Schmoe's business because of Obamacare motivates him to hire more workers and expand his business.

Your typical non-response will prove you are full of shit.

Liberals being stupid people believe adding costs to a company's bottomline will stimulate them to hire more workers.

The evil liberals that passed this bill know better, they did this on purpose.

^^^^^^

needs meds

since when does education mean you're not insane.

again...

you need meds. seek help.

 

[saveliberty]

Let see, I make $251,000, so I qualify as one of these rich people. Now I'm going to go on one vacation this year (we cut back) at $100,000 by Jillian's accounting. Then we ate dinner every day (what were we thinking) 365 x 1,000 = $365,000. So I'm $214,000 in the hole before taxes.

 

[jillian]

Let see, I make $251,000, so I qualify as one of these rich people. Now I'm going to go on one vacation this year (we cut back) at $100,000 by Jillian's accounting. Then we ate dinner every day (what were we thinking) 365 x 1,000 = $365,000. So I'm $214,000 in the hole before taxes.

you don't have a 50 person business and aren't making the kind of money we're talking about....

and i can assure you my numbers aren't wrong... although the $100,000 vacation includes meals.

this conversation was not about the gee, 2 to 4% in increased taxes for the top 1% we're talking about, it's the effect of the ACA on companies with more than 50 employees so you're not following the topic anyway.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Wrong. It's how you keep things into perspective instead of buying into the doom and gloom hysteria.

To cover the $50k cost, on 55 employees, it's $20 bucks a paycheck. Versus:

unemployment.
bankruptcy.

Right because it's never a big deal to write a check on somebody elses account

Why not start cutting government spending be reducing all federal employees by $20/paycheck?

2.1MM*20*26= $1,092MM annually

Aren't you part of that tribe of clowns who are sneezing at $80 billion in tax revenue from the wealthy because it doesn't single handedly eliminate the deficit?

No, I'm saying that your economics ideas have a 100% Fail Rate and usually always accomplish the opposite of what you tell us.

Your side does not seem to know that the US economy and the Federal Government are 2 different things

 

[rightwinger]

As it now stands, small business pays cut rate wages and allows the taxpayer to make up the difference

Your workers can't afford the rent from what you pay? The taxpayers will provide them low cost housing
Your workers can't feed their families from what you pay? The taxpayers will provide food stamps
Your workers can't afford healthcare from what you pay? Don't worry....taxpayers will make up the difference

Bottom line: Your business survives because the taxpayer is there to suppliment your low wages

 

[depotoo]

No, it will be $50K since the first thirty aren't part of the penalty.

Like I said, Progressive ideas are great as long as someone else is paying for them

Is $50K no big deal to a 50 person company?

why do you think $1,000 a year per person is a big deal to a company....

maybe you should look at the raises the owners/CEO's give themselves before you feel badly for them?

you are talking mega corporations - not the average small business owner here, jillian. An extra grand a year per employee without increased revenue to back it up, can break many small businesses. Many.

 

[GoneBezerk]

Like I said, you're full of shit.

Your deflection calling someone insane because they state basic economic principles proves you are ******* insane and stupid.

You've never seen the inside of a college classroom, so shut the **** up.

Shitbag....I have a BA in Economics and a MBA.

What are your credentials in this area?

So tell us how more costs and regulation on Joe Schmoe's business because of Obamacare motivates him to hire more workers and expand his business.

Your typical non-response will prove you are full of shit.

^^^^^^

needs meds

since when does education mean you're not insane.

again...

you need meds. seek help.

 

[jillian]

Right because it's never a big deal to write a check on somebody elses account

Why not start cutting government spending be reducing all federal employees by $20/paycheck?

2.1MM*20*26= $1,092MM annually

Aren't you part of that tribe of clowns who are sneezing at $80 billion in tax revenue from the wealthy because it doesn't single handedly eliminate the deficit?

No, I'm saying that your economics ideas have a 100% Fail Rate and usually always accomplish the opposite of what you tell us.

Your side does not seem to know that the US economy and the Federal Government are 2 different things

what has 100% fail rate is rightwing trickle down economics.

 

[Ravi]

Like I said, Progressive ideas are great as long as someone else is paying for them

Is $50K no big deal to a 50 person company?

It wouldn't be to me. It certainly wouldn't stop me from doubling my business.

Or Tripling! OMG!

Also, make the Obamaphone the new company phone

Not surprising, you miss the point.

Now you're just flailing. Oh wait, that's all you ever do.

 

[Jarhead]

Let see, I make $251,000, so I qualify as one of these rich people. Now I'm going to go on one vacation this year (we cut back) at $100,000 by Jillian's accounting. Then we ate dinner every day (what were we thinking) 365 x 1,000 = $365,000. So I'm $214,000 in the hole before taxes.

you don't have a 50 person business and aren't making the kind of money we're talking about....

and i can assure you my numbers aren't wrong... although the $100,000 vacation includes meals.

this conversation was not about the gee, 2 to 4% in increased taxes we're talking about for the top 1% so you're not following the topic anyway.

At our peak we had over 300 temporary employees that were working 40 hours a week on our behalf in the offices of our clients. We had an operations staff of 25 permanent employees over two locations...one in Manhattan and one on Long Island. We needed both offices to cater to the interviewing of temps as our assignments were in both areas. We had E and O insurance, Workers Comp and a payroll service.

My partner and I did well.....but to spend anything above 10K on a family vacation for 4 was irresponsible...and usually we spent less. I never took more than 10 days at a tiome...and rarely more than once a year.

An evening out with my wife was a nice dinner of maybe 150 bucks....once a week at most. My kids went to camp and I paid for their colleges. We drove nice cars....usually infinitis although we just got the 335i (wow....love it)....

So, in essence...I employed 325 people, made about 300-350K and lived a nice upper middle class lifestyle. During my waning years, my income dropped to less than 200K....over the 3 decades...making an adjustment for inflation and CoL increases, I averaged in the 300K a year range...

Your perception of business owners is wrong. Most do not have the million dollar salaries and golden parachutes. Most are not "the elite"...and most CARE about their employees.

Until you see that, you will continue to blast hard working individuals who had the gutsa to "take the plunge" and start a business.....and ironically, it seems you blast them once they acheive success....

To be frank...I dont get it.

 

[saveliberty]

Let see, I make $251,000, so I qualify as one of these rich people. Now I'm going to go on one vacation this year (we cut back) at $100,000 by Jillian's accounting. Then we ate dinner every day (what were we thinking) 365 x 1,000 = $365,000. So I'm $214,000 in the hole before taxes.

you don't have a 50 person business and aren't making the kind of money we're talking about....

and i can assure you my numbers aren't wrong... although the $100,000 vacation includes meals.

this conversation was not about the gee, 2 to 4% in increased taxes for the top 1% we're talking about, it's the effect of the ACA on companies with more than 50 employees so you're not following the topic anyway.

I can assure you that your numbers are crap. You brought something into the discussion that was wrong and off topic not me.