vector Wrote:he works in the union that's why last time I worked for the umwa didn't have to pay for nothing don't know what it is now but i'm sure it's very little maybe nothing
These guys always say "screw unions", let them figure out their employers are screwing their lights out.
TheRealVille Wrote:The points are still valid, no matter the source. You operate as expected. If it doesn't suit you, shout liberal media.
And what do you do when you don't like what you read from a "conservative media" source?
Modern liberalism is nothing but a fraternity of liars. The media has a strong liberal bias, so liberals find comfort in mainstream media reports. Among popular media outlets, Fox News was virtually alone in reporting the Benghazi cover-up and other major Obama scandals. Even now, liberal news organizations are still spending an inordinate amount of time ignoring several scandals, each of which has the potential of bringing down the administration of their comrade in chief.
Hoot Gibson Wrote:Modern liberalism is nothing but a fraternity of liars. The media has a strong liberal bias, so liberals find comfort in mainstream media reports. Among popular media outlets, Fox News was virtually alone in reporting the Benghazi cover-up and other major Obama scandals. Even now, liberal news organizations are still spending an inordinate amount of time ignoring several scandals, each of which has the potential of bringing down the administration of their comrade in chief.
Not going to happen. In the end the Washington republicans and Fox will come out looking like the "shit stirrers" that they are. Congress has the lowest approval rating in history, and in 2014 you will see what I say is right. I'd bet even money that they lose even more seats than they lost on 2012. The only thing that saved them was redistricting, that worked in republicans favor. The "middle aged, angry, white man" party is the same as done, it's dying a slow painful death.
TheRealVille Wrote:Not going to happen. In the end the Washington republicans and Fox will come out looking like the "shit stirrers" that they are. Congress has the lowest approval rating in history, and in 2014 you will see what I say is right. I'd bet even money that they lose even more seats than they lost on 2012. The only thing that saved them was redistricting, that worked in republicans favor. The "middle aged, angry, white man" party is the same as done, it's dying a slow painful death.
:lmao: :biglmao: :hilarious: :lmao: :lmao: :biglmao: :hilarious: :biglmao: :lmao:
WideMiddle03 Wrote::lmao: :biglmao: :hilarious: :lmao: :lmao: :biglmao: :hilarious: :biglmao: :lmao:
Laugh it up. Your guys couldn't even beat Obama. They lost seats in the Senate, and House. It's pretty evident they are toast, as a party. In a year that they should have easily won seats in both side of congress, they lost instead.
TheRealVille Wrote:Laugh it up. Your guys couldn't even beat Obama. They lost seats in the Senate, and House. It's pretty evident they are toast, as a party. In a year that they should have easily won seats in both side of congress, they lost instead.
what's your point, other than proving how stupid ppl r
that's all u have to brag about is winning elections
richard nixon had 500+ electoral votes
using your logic, hes the greatest president ever
WideMiddle03 Wrote:what's your point, other than proving how stupid ppl r
that's all u have to brag about is winning elections
richard nixon had 500+ electoral votes
using your logic, hes the greatest president ever
The point is that you laugh when I say the republican party is dying a slow death. And, the fact that they should have been able to win seat in both hoses, and for sure should have beat the most "beatable" President in history, according to you guys. They couldn't do either.
TheRealVille Wrote:Not going to happen. In the end the Washington republicans and Fox will come out looking like the "shit stirrers" that they are. Congress has the lowest approval rating in history, and in 2014 you will see what I say is right. I'd bet even money that they lose even more seats than they lost on 2012. The only thing that saved them was redistricting, that worked in republicans favor. The "middle aged, angry, white man" party is the same as done, it's dying a slow painful death.
Most of what you say in this forum consists of the same lies that Obama feeds you and anybody who spends much time reading your posts already knows it. Sometimes bad guys win, and whether they win a few elections or not does not justify their abuses of power. You are the kind of follower that aspiring dictators dream of.
TheRealVille Wrote:The point is that you laugh when I say the republican party is dying a slow death. And, the fact that they should have been able to win seat in both hoses, and for sure should have beat the most "beatable" President in history, according to you guys. They couldn't do either.
no one ever says obama was the most beatable
with the media having so much of his semen in their stomachs you would think he was the best thing since sliced bread from watching see bs or the national barack channel
ppl like u who r stupid enough 2 listen 2 everything the media says were the ones who voted him in again
TheRealVille Wrote:^Chester 
nicker:
u going to comment on my point or just make urself look stupider by dodging
WideMiddle03 Wrote:u going to comment on my point or just make urself look stupider by dodging
Anybody that is as incompetent as you guys say Obama is, should have been an easy win, especially with the money republicans spent. Fact is, you lost seats in both houses, lost the presidency, and more will come in 2014 and 2016.
TheRealVille Wrote:At 2500.00 a year, he might as well not have insurance. If he is young, and pretty healthy, he isn't even getting close to that 2500.00. I hope his employer isn't taking insurance money out of his check. It's free money for someone, but not insurance for RIUTG. Somebody down the line is getting screwed royally.
Everyone i know has moved to the HSA's at there workplace and nearly everyone has a deductible of 2000 or higher.
If you pay 350 than 20%, more years than not your paying a lot more than me.
I have Anthem, as well as millions of others. I havent even used my insurance this year. Havent been to the doctor or anything, but lets say i break a toe, you know its going to be more than 2500 if i go to the ER. And then im out 2500 at one swipe.
A plan like yours, or a PPO plan is way to expensive now. Almost 200 a month out of your check and then it pays 80%. No deductible, but hell it cost 200 a month. And thats with Anthem.
I didnt mean to jump on your with the earlier post, but i knew there was no way you could have a 350 deductible and then 100% free.
The one "good" thing is if i have a million dollars in medical bills, im only out 2500. I feel bad for those that need medication every month when its 200 or 300 an they have a plan like mine.
RunItUpTheGut Wrote:Everyone i know has moved to the HSA's at there workplace and nearly everyone has a deductible of 2000 or higher.
If you pay 350 than 20%, more years than not your paying a lot more than me.
I have Anthem, as well as millions of others. I havent even used my insurance this year. Havent been to the doctor or anything, but lets say i break a toe, you know its going to be more than 2500 if i go to the ER. And then im out 2500 at one swipe.
A plan like yours, or a PPO plan is way to expensive now. Almost 200 a month out of your check and then it pays 80%. No deductible, but hell it cost 200 a month. And thats with Anthem.
I didnt mean to jump on your with the earlier post, but i knew there was no way you could have a 350 deductible and then 100% free.
The one "good" thing is if i have a million dollars in medical bills, im only out 2500. I feel bad for those that need medication every month when its 200 or 300 an they have a plan like mine.
No I'm not. After 350, I pay 20%. That's 20 dollars to every hundred. I go to the doctor 4 times a year, and my part is 20 dollars each time. That's what, 80 bucks plus 350? My premium cost is bid into my pay package. The employer pays it. It's a fringe benefit.
Employees pay for all the pay and benefits that they receive. They also pay all of the taxes that employers pay to the government. There are no freebies, no matter who employs you. Every penny that a corporation pays to the government, insurance company, or anybody else is a penny that it does not have to pay its employees. The stupidest thing that liberals do is call on the government to stick it to corporations. It is like wearing a "kick me" sign around 24-7.
Hoot Gibson Wrote:Employees pay for all the pay and benefits that they receive. They also pay all of the taxes that employers pay to the government. There are no freebies, no matter who employs you. Every penny that a corporation pays to the government, insurance company, or anybody else is a penny that it does not have to pay its employees. The stupidest thing that liberals do is call on the government to stick it to corporations. It is like wearing a "kick me" sign around 24-7.
My hourly pay is somewhere in the neighborhood of 30-36 dollars depending on where I work. That's what I get on the check. Insurance and retirement is above that, and in the fringe column, bid into the package at contract time.
TheRealVille Wrote:My hourly pay is somewhere in the neighborhood of 30-36 dollars depending on where I work. That's what I get on the check. Insurance and retirement is above that, and in the fringe column, bid into the package at contract time.
Understood. But whatever your employer provides to you as "fringe benefits" is money that could be paid to you in wages instead, at no additional cost to the company. Your work pays for all of the wages and benefits that you received. When the government takes a bigger chunk of your employer's money in taxes, then they have less money to pay salaries and benefits. It is simple economics. Everybody wins when corporations operate profitably, yet unions support boondoggles like Obamacare that will have a direct impact on your wages and benefits. That impact may not be felt until it is time to negotiate new contracts, but it will be felt.
Hoot Gibson Wrote:Employees pay for all the pay and benefits that they receive. They also pay all of the taxes that employers pay to the government. There are no freebies, no matter who employs you. Every penny that a corporation pays to the government, insurance company, or anybody else is a penny that it does not have to pay its employees. The stupidest thing that liberals do is call on the government to stick it to corporations. It is like wearing a "kick me" sign around 24-7.
da who makes the Employees there money
vector Wrote:da who makes the Employees there money
What a hoot, you calling anybody a "da". To answer your question, not that you will understand, the work of employees, combined with the capital supplied by the owner(s) make the owner(s) money. Employees are a cost to the company, and profit-wise, it does not matter to a company what the mix of pay and benefits are because both are expenses.
Owners of businesses do not have secret money trees. When governments raise taxes, then business owners will look for ways to preserve their profits. At some point, your pay and benefits will take a hit. It may not be a cut, but wage and benefits increases will be less than they could be without the additional taxes. Like I said, when union members support punitive taxes, they might as well get somebody to stick a big "Kick me" sign on their backs. Yet, we see unions bite the hands that feed them everyday when they support socialist policies, such as the ones that crowd everything else off of Barack Obama's agenda.
Of course, if you are a stay at home "worker" who draws checks for a living, then it is in your short term interest to see Obama "stick it to the Man." As Lady Thatcher said, the problem with socialists (a/k/a modern liberals) is that they eventually run out of other people's money.
Hoot Gibson Wrote:What a hoot, you calling anybody a "da". To answer your question, not that you will understand, the work of employees, combined with the capital supplied by the owner(s) make the owner(s) money. Employees are a cost to the company, and profit-wise, it does not matter to a company what the mix of pay and benefits are because both are expenses.
Owners of businesses do not have secret money trees. When governments raise taxes, then business owners will look for ways to preserve their profits. At some point, your pay and benefits will take a hit. It may not be a cut, but wage and benefits increases will be less than they could be without the additional taxes. Like I said, when union members support punitive taxes, they might as well get somebody to stick a big "Kick me" sign on their backs. Yet, we see unions bite the hands that feed them everyday when they support socialist policies, such as the ones that crowd everything else off of Barack Obama's agenda.
Of course, if you are a stay at home "worker" who draws checks for a living, then it is in your short term interest to see Obama "stick it to the Man." As Lady Thatcher said, the problem with socialists (a/k/a modern liberals) is that they eventually run out of other people's money.
you are the one who could not make it in the real world not me I work in the private industry not for the taxpayer
vector Wrote:you are the one who could not make it in the real world not me I work in the private industry not for the taxpayer
I have a hard time believing that someone as ignorant as yourself is employable in such a horrible economy, with so many qualified, intelligent people looking for jobs. How did you ever manage to fill out a job application that anybody could read?
vector Wrote:you are the one who could not make it in the real world not me I work in the private industry not for the taxpayer
I absolutely believe that you don't work for taxpayers.
TheRealVille Wrote:No I'm not. After 350, I pay 20%. That's 20 dollars to every hundred. I go to the doctor 4 times a year, and my part is 20 dollars each time. That's what, 80 bucks plus 350? My premium cost is bid into my pay package. The employer pays it. It's a fringe benefit.
Then thats the proof as to why companies are going broke.
There having to give all there profits to pay for union healthcare.
When i was 18, over ten years ago, i had a job where my health insurance costed $1.63 a week and had a $20.00 deductible and then i had to pay 8% of cost.
It was excellent insurance, and by 2009, that same company, which is provately owned, had to switch to an HSA with a 2,500 deductible that costed 15 dollars a week.
I wonder why it had to change in 2009? It was good before that...
RunItUpTheGut Wrote:Then thats the proof as to why companies are going broke.
There having to give all there profits to pay for union healthcare.
When i was 18, over ten years ago, i had a job where my health insurance costed $1.63 a week and had a $20.00 deductible and then i had to pay 8% of cost.
It was excellent insurance, and by 2009, that same company, which is provately owned, had to switch to an HSA with a 2,500 deductible that costed 15 dollars a week.
I wonder why it had to change in 2009? It was good before that...
Compared to your healthcare, that is basically useless to you, being 29 years old? I'm very ok with the insurance your company provides you, if you are. Let's see, the companies I work for are posting record profits the last few years, I guess if that's going broke, they will be closing the doors any day.
I'm not saying you are fibbing, but I've never in my life heard of 32.00 dollars a month health insurance premium. Or, even a 45.00 one for that matter.
Hoot Gibson Wrote:What a hoot, you calling anybody a "da". To answer your question, not that you will understand, the work of employees, combined with the capital supplied by the owner(s) make the owner(s) money. Employees are a cost to the company, and profit-wise, it does not matter to a company what the mix of pay and benefits are because both are expenses.
Owners of businesses do not have secret money trees. When governments raise taxes, then business owners will look for ways to preserve their profits. At some point, your pay and benefits will take a hit. It may not be a cut, but wage and benefits increases will be less than they could be without the additional taxes. Like I said, when union members support punitive taxes, they might as well get somebody to stick a big "Kick me" sign on their backs. Yet, we see unions bite the hands that feed them everyday when they support socialist policies, such as the ones that crowd everything else off of Barack Obama's agenda.
Of course, if you are a stay at home "worker" who draws checks for a living, then it is in your short term interest to see Obama "stick it to the Man." As Lady Thatcher said, the problem with socialists (a/k/a modern liberals) is that they eventually run out of other people's money.
Forget it Hoot I have never seen a union member understand anything about business. They really do believe in the money tree thing.
the other guy Wrote:Forget it Hoot I have never seen a union member understand anything about business. They really do believe in the money tree thing.
I'm union. The companies I work for post record profits. How are they doing that, with hiring union help and all. "Doing it right the first time" really does mean something to companies that hire union. We also hold a much better safety record, which also save companies money. To be sure, you guys that don't have a clue about how unions help companies, shouldn't even comment on the subject.
the other guy Wrote:Forget it Hoot I have never seen a union member understand anything about business. They really do believe in the money tree thing.
da don't you follow the stock market companys in the us are making record profits
![[Image: liberal-logic-gun-violence-liberals-want...939884.jpg]](http://cdn.motinetwork.net/politifake.org/image/political/1304/liberal-logic-gun-violence-liberals-want-sue-gun-makers-and-politics-1366939884.jpg){kind=link}