Waco Posted July 6, 2012 Posted July 6, 2012 All I'll say is this. My dad and aunt both own their own businesses. Because of this stupid law and how it's written, they both now have HUGE incentives to stay under 50 employees (since it's the cutoff for where you have to pay massive amounts of money for benefits). It doesn't affect me much personally, yet. I have crappy health insurance as it is (being a student) and I've shelled out thousands in the past few months because of my car accident. That said, I didn't have to pay 80% of my bills and my premiums are reasonable. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
CowKing Posted July 6, 2012 Posted July 6, 2012 All I'll say is this. My dad and aunt both own their own businesses. Because of this stupid law and how it's written, they both now have HUGE incentives to stay under 50 employees (since it's the cutoff for where you have to pay massive amounts of money for benefits). I think the key word here is incentives. It's not a detriment to having more employees. If their business is so good that it requires more than 50 workers than that will just push them to continue growing their business. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Waco Posted July 6, 2012 Posted July 6, 2012 I think the key word here is incentives. It's not a detriment to having more employees. If their business is so good that it requires more than 50 workers than that will just push them to continue growing their business. Not really. The penalty isn't outweighed until you get quite a bit over 50...so making the jump is difficult. Good help is hard to find these days...nobody wants to work. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deathmineral Posted July 7, 2012 Posted July 7, 2012 nobody wants to work. Yeah, that's where the problem is, I'm sure of it. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
KennyisKing Posted July 15, 2012 Posted July 15, 2012 (edited) We should remember that virtually everything government does is a ‘mandate.’ The issue is not whether Congress can compel commerce by forcing you to buy insurance, or simply compel you to pay a tax if you don’t. The issue is that this compulsion implies the use of government force against those who refuse. The fundamental hallmark of a free society should be the rejection of force. In a free society, therefore, individuals could opt out of “Obamacare” without paying a government tribute. Those in Congress who believe in individual liberty must work tirelessly to repeal this national health care law and reduce federal involvement in healthcare generally. Obamacare can only increase third party interference in the doctor-patient relationship, increase costs, and reduce the quality of care. Only free market medicine can restore the critical independence of doctors, reduce costs through real competition and price sensitivity, and eliminate enormous paperwork burdens. Americans will opt out of Obamacare with or without Congress. Edited July 15, 2012 by KennyisKing Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdm_freek Posted July 15, 2012 Posted July 15, 2012 (edited) You're entitled to your opinion, but what specifics of the bill do you oppose, rather than flaming the bill as a whole and inciting a possible flame war in this thread? being forced to get a micro chip in our right hand and i pay good money for the three separate insurances for my family because of the conditions my daughter has under this plan she could die her medicine is over $5000 a month and his plan ignores the young and old and if it goes through which one of you will receive his mark Edited July 15, 2012 by jdm_freek Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coors Posted July 15, 2012 Posted July 15, 2012 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now