[LA Reader]

[quote=CA renter]

Perhaps we could come up with a system whereby those who elect to have LLC/corporate protections will have their total compensation restricted to a lower multiple of the lowest-paid person who works for the same company or group of companies.

The elite have made sure they are protected. I like to see the “little guy” (who does all the work) protected as well; which is why I support unions and trade restrictions.[/quote]

I hate the Unions and their BS tactics. They had their place in the History but now they are as much a cause of destruction of American Competitiveness as those CEO’s who make Millions while their company loses money.

I’ve dealt with them in many instances and they just breed laziness and sense of entitlement. I don’t buy into this “real work” is only in physical labor/making something. In my business, people who work the hardest are the management & salaried employees who gets no OT but just really want to do a good for the company while those so called people who do “The Real Work” just complain about their rates, Bennies, holiday pay, lunch, turn arounds and title constantly. And those guys actually make a lot of money while Salaried employees make very little unless they make it to Upper Management.

But I am all for tying CEO’s & Board of Directors pay to multiples of lowest paid employee or to average pay of none upper executive employees.

We pay insane amount of money to Executives and this is not a norm. And this “if we don’t pay all the best brains will leave us” excuse is a BS. Executives in Most other countries don’t make that kind of crazy money, so where the hell are they going to go?

[LA Reader]

[quote=CA renter]

Perhaps we could come up with a system whereby those who elect to have LLC/corporate protections will have their total compensation restricted to a lower multiple of the lowest-paid person who works for the same company or group of companies.

The elite have made sure they are protected. I like to see the “little guy” (who does all the work) protected as well; which is why I support unions and trade restrictions.[/quote]

I hate the Unions and their BS tactics. They had their place in the History but now they are as much a cause of destruction of American Competitiveness as those CEO’s who make Millions while their company loses money.

I’ve dealt with them in many instances and they just breed laziness and sense of entitlement. I don’t buy into this “real work” is only in physical labor/making something. In my business, people who work the hardest are the management & salaried employees who gets no OT but just really want to do a good for the company while those so called people who do “The Real Work” just complain about their rates, Bennies, holiday pay, lunch, turn arounds and title constantly. And those guys actually make a lot of money while Salaried employees make very little unless they make it to Upper Management.

But I am all for tying CEO’s & Board of Directors pay to multiples of lowest paid employee or to average pay of none upper executive employees.

We pay insane amount of money to Executives and this is not a norm. And this “if we don’t pay all the best brains will leave us” excuse is a BS. Executives in Most other countries don’t make that kind of crazy money, so where the hell are they going to go?

[LA Reader]

[quote=CA renter]

Perhaps we could come up with a system whereby those who elect to have LLC/corporate protections will have their total compensation restricted to a lower multiple of the lowest-paid person who works for the same company or group of companies.

The elite have made sure they are protected. I like to see the “little guy” (who does all the work) protected as well; which is why I support unions and trade restrictions.[/quote]

I hate the Unions and their BS tactics. They had their place in the History but now they are as much a cause of destruction of American Competitiveness as those CEO’s who make Millions while their company loses money.

I’ve dealt with them in many instances and they just breed laziness and sense of entitlement. I don’t buy into this “real work” is only in physical labor/making something. In my business, people who work the hardest are the management & salaried employees who gets no OT but just really want to do a good for the company while those so called people who do “The Real Work” just complain about their rates, Bennies, holiday pay, lunch, turn arounds and title constantly. And those guys actually make a lot of money while Salaried employees make very little unless they make it to Upper Management.

But I am all for tying CEO’s & Board of Directors pay to multiples of lowest paid employee or to average pay of none upper executive employees.

We pay insane amount of money to Executives and this is not a norm. And this “if we don’t pay all the best brains will leave us” excuse is a BS. Executives in Most other countries don’t make that kind of crazy money, so where the hell are they going to go?

[LA Reader]

[quote=CA renter]

Perhaps we could come up with a system whereby those who elect to have LLC/corporate protections will have their total compensation restricted to a lower multiple of the lowest-paid person who works for the same company or group of companies.

The elite have made sure they are protected. I like to see the “little guy” (who does all the work) protected as well; which is why I support unions and trade restrictions.[/quote]

I hate the Unions and their BS tactics. They had their place in the History but now they are as much a cause of destruction of American Competitiveness as those CEO’s who make Millions while their company loses money.

I’ve dealt with them in many instances and they just breed laziness and sense of entitlement. I don’t buy into this “real work” is only in physical labor/making something. In my business, people who work the hardest are the management & salaried employees who gets no OT but just really want to do a good for the company while those so called people who do “The Real Work” just complain about their rates, Bennies, holiday pay, lunch, turn arounds and title constantly. And those guys actually make a lot of money while Salaried employees make very little unless they make it to Upper Management.

But I am all for tying CEO’s & Board of Directors pay to multiples of lowest paid employee or to average pay of none upper executive employees.

We pay insane amount of money to Executives and this is not a norm. And this “if we don’t pay all the best brains will leave us” excuse is a BS. Executives in Most other countries don’t make that kind of crazy money, so where the hell are they going to go?

[LA Reader]

[quote=CA renter]

Perhaps we could come up with a system whereby those who elect to have LLC/corporate protections will have their total compensation restricted to a lower multiple of the lowest-paid person who works for the same company or group of companies.

The elite have made sure they are protected. I like to see the “little guy” (who does all the work) protected as well; which is why I support unions and trade restrictions.[/quote]

I hate the Unions and their BS tactics. They had their place in the History but now they are as much a cause of destruction of American Competitiveness as those CEO’s who make Millions while their company loses money.

I’ve dealt with them in many instances and they just breed laziness and sense of entitlement. I don’t buy into this “real work” is only in physical labor/making something. In my business, people who work the hardest are the management & salaried employees who gets no OT but just really want to do a good for the company while those so called people who do “The Real Work” just complain about their rates, Bennies, holiday pay, lunch, turn arounds and title constantly. And those guys actually make a lot of money while Salaried employees make very little unless they make it to Upper Management.

But I am all for tying CEO’s & Board of Directors pay to multiples of lowest paid employee or to average pay of none upper executive employees.

We pay insane amount of money to Executives and this is not a norm. And this “if we don’t pay all the best brains will leave us” excuse is a BS. Executives in Most other countries don’t make that kind of crazy money, so where the hell are they going to go?

[LA Reader]

[quote=sdduuuude]

Having a minimum wage doesn’t affect the value of the work we can do. It simply makes it economically infeasible for legitimate businesses to hire people who can’t do a job that is not worth more than min wage. So, those poeople don’t work. Or they go on welfare. It’s a system designed to waste taxpayers’ money.

It’s like saying “lets make the ‘minimum price’ for hot dogs $15. Would the price of hot dogs go up? No. People would stop selling them because nobody would buy them. The value of a hot dog is what it is. Setting a min price doesn’t change that and results in fewer sales.

If min wage is so useful, why not set it at $100/hr ? Then we’d all be rich !!!! Oh. I see. There is an “optimal” minimum wage you say? How does one determine the optimal value for a minimum wage? Ah. We rely on the brillian economists that didn’t see any of the current mess coming. That’s how

It’s just absurd that someone thinks they can pull a minimum wage value out of their ass, thinking they can actually help the economy. It is one of the stupidist economic decisions ever made.[/quote]

Not true. In certain countries cars at taxed at almost 100%. So a car that cost $25k here cost $50k there. So in essence in those countries the government decided that “Hot Dog” is $15. People have no choice but they still want “Hot Dog” so they buy them at the inflated price.

Hell I’ve seen Americans pay $50 for Pizza Hut Pizza because they missed the American Taste while abroad.

Value of things are all relative. Just like housing prices.

[LA Reader]

[quote=sdduuuude]

Having a minimum wage doesn’t affect the value of the work we can do. It simply makes it economically infeasible for legitimate businesses to hire people who can’t do a job that is not worth more than min wage. So, those poeople don’t work. Or they go on welfare. It’s a system designed to waste taxpayers’ money.

It’s like saying “lets make the ‘minimum price’ for hot dogs $15. Would the price of hot dogs go up? No. People would stop selling them because nobody would buy them. The value of a hot dog is what it is. Setting a min price doesn’t change that and results in fewer sales.

If min wage is so useful, why not set it at $100/hr ? Then we’d all be rich !!!! Oh. I see. There is an “optimal” minimum wage you say? How does one determine the optimal value for a minimum wage? Ah. We rely on the brillian economists that didn’t see any of the current mess coming. That’s how

It’s just absurd that someone thinks they can pull a minimum wage value out of their ass, thinking they can actually help the economy. It is one of the stupidist economic decisions ever made.[/quote]

Not true. In certain countries cars at taxed at almost 100%. So a car that cost $25k here cost $50k there. So in essence in those countries the government decided that “Hot Dog” is $15. People have no choice but they still want “Hot Dog” so they buy them at the inflated price.

Hell I’ve seen Americans pay $50 for Pizza Hut Pizza because they missed the American Taste while abroad.

Value of things are all relative. Just like housing prices.

[LA Reader]

[quote=sdduuuude]

Having a minimum wage doesn’t affect the value of the work we can do. It simply makes it economically infeasible for legitimate businesses to hire people who can’t do a job that is not worth more than min wage. So, those poeople don’t work. Or they go on welfare. It’s a system designed to waste taxpayers’ money.

It’s like saying “lets make the ‘minimum price’ for hot dogs $15. Would the price of hot dogs go up? No. People would stop selling them because nobody would buy them. The value of a hot dog is what it is. Setting a min price doesn’t change that and results in fewer sales.

If min wage is so useful, why not set it at $100/hr ? Then we’d all be rich !!!! Oh. I see. There is an “optimal” minimum wage you say? How does one determine the optimal value for a minimum wage? Ah. We rely on the brillian economists that didn’t see any of the current mess coming. That’s how

It’s just absurd that someone thinks they can pull a minimum wage value out of their ass, thinking they can actually help the economy. It is one of the stupidist economic decisions ever made.[/quote]

Not true. In certain countries cars at taxed at almost 100%. So a car that cost $25k here cost $50k there. So in essence in those countries the government decided that “Hot Dog” is $15. People have no choice but they still want “Hot Dog” so they buy them at the inflated price.

Hell I’ve seen Americans pay $50 for Pizza Hut Pizza because they missed the American Taste while abroad.

Value of things are all relative. Just like housing prices.

[LA Reader]

[quote=sdduuuude]

Having a minimum wage doesn’t affect the value of the work we can do. It simply makes it economically infeasible for legitimate businesses to hire people who can’t do a job that is not worth more than min wage. So, those poeople don’t work. Or they go on welfare. It’s a system designed to waste taxpayers’ money.

It’s like saying “lets make the ‘minimum price’ for hot dogs $15. Would the price of hot dogs go up? No. People would stop selling them because nobody would buy them. The value of a hot dog is what it is. Setting a min price doesn’t change that and results in fewer sales.

If min wage is so useful, why not set it at $100/hr ? Then we’d all be rich !!!! Oh. I see. There is an “optimal” minimum wage you say? How does one determine the optimal value for a minimum wage? Ah. We rely on the brillian economists that didn’t see any of the current mess coming. That’s how

It’s just absurd that someone thinks they can pull a minimum wage value out of their ass, thinking they can actually help the economy. It is one of the stupidist economic decisions ever made.[/quote]

Not true. In certain countries cars at taxed at almost 100%. So a car that cost $25k here cost $50k there. So in essence in those countries the government decided that “Hot Dog” is $15. People have no choice but they still want “Hot Dog” so they buy them at the inflated price.

Hell I’ve seen Americans pay $50 for Pizza Hut Pizza because they missed the American Taste while abroad.

Value of things are all relative. Just like housing prices.

[LA Reader]

[quote=sdduuuude]

Having a minimum wage doesn’t affect the value of the work we can do. It simply makes it economically infeasible for legitimate businesses to hire people who can’t do a job that is not worth more than min wage. So, those poeople don’t work. Or they go on welfare. It’s a system designed to waste taxpayers’ money.

It’s like saying “lets make the ‘minimum price’ for hot dogs $15. Would the price of hot dogs go up? No. People would stop selling them because nobody would buy them. The value of a hot dog is what it is. Setting a min price doesn’t change that and results in fewer sales.

If min wage is so useful, why not set it at $100/hr ? Then we’d all be rich !!!! Oh. I see. There is an “optimal” minimum wage you say? How does one determine the optimal value for a minimum wage? Ah. We rely on the brillian economists that didn’t see any of the current mess coming. That’s how

It’s just absurd that someone thinks they can pull a minimum wage value out of their ass, thinking they can actually help the economy. It is one of the stupidist economic decisions ever made.[/quote]

Not true. In certain countries cars at taxed at almost 100%. So a car that cost $25k here cost $50k there. So in essence in those countries the government decided that “Hot Dog” is $15. People have no choice but they still want “Hot Dog” so they buy them at the inflated price.

Hell I’ve seen Americans pay $50 for Pizza Hut Pizza because they missed the American Taste while abroad.

Value of things are all relative. Just like housing prices.

[LA Reader]

[quote=
So let me try again:
If the ones without coverage today and cannot afford coverage today, how does this bill make it more affordable in the future?[/quote]

It doesn’t now that everything that would’ve made it cheaper was taken out by “Moderate Democrats”.

It’s a huge Hand out bill to the insurance industry. Taking Tax dollar and requiring everyone to have insurance. The reform made sense when it contained public option to force insurance company to compete against cheaper alternative. But now this bill would deliver additional 30 million customers to insurance companies and allow them to charge them whatever they want.

In the end, true health care reform will only happen when the cost becomes so large that even large corporations and government have to drop medical insurance as part of benefit package.

Meanwhile, people like me who has to buy my insurance in indivisual market will continue to face price increase of 25% to 40% every year, reduced coverage and constant fear of being dropped whenever we get seriously sick or injured. I do not go to doctors since every little visit will be counted against my premium increase for the future or step towards becoming un-insurable. I tried changing my insurance a year ago and I gave up when the new insurance company gave me a 30 page document to get my medical history. They asked for specific dates of doctors visits, reason, any medication taken and specific amounts of each medication and dates taken for the past 5 years. It was asked in a such a specific way that unless you’ve been keeping a special medical journal or excel sheet of every visit and every medicine you’ve taken, there was no way for a person to not make a mistake. And we all know any mistake on those is an excuse for them to drop you when you get sick.

Can you remember the dates of every doctors visit for last 5 years and how many milligrams of each medication you have taken?

And why is insurance company exempt from Anti-trust laws?

At this point I want to start a movement to take health care benefits away from all federal and local government employees.

Hey, why not? They should do just fine in Indivisual market as long as HSA accounts gets expanded right? If it’s good enough for me, it should be good enough for government employees.

We want small government, right? I’m sure this would help a lot to reduce federal & local government budget deficit.

Oh by the way, I pay Taxes on my Insurance cost so why is it big deal to tax employer provided insurance?

[LA Reader]

[quote=
So let me try again:
If the ones without coverage today and cannot afford coverage today, how does this bill make it more affordable in the future?[/quote]

It doesn’t now that everything that would’ve made it cheaper was taken out by “Moderate Democrats”.

It’s a huge Hand out bill to the insurance industry. Taking Tax dollar and requiring everyone to have insurance. The reform made sense when it contained public option to force insurance company to compete against cheaper alternative. But now this bill would deliver additional 30 million customers to insurance companies and allow them to charge them whatever they want.

In the end, true health care reform will only happen when the cost becomes so large that even large corporations and government have to drop medical insurance as part of benefit package.

Meanwhile, people like me who has to buy my insurance in indivisual market will continue to face price increase of 25% to 40% every year, reduced coverage and constant fear of being dropped whenever we get seriously sick or injured. I do not go to doctors since every little visit will be counted against my premium increase for the future or step towards becoming un-insurable. I tried changing my insurance a year ago and I gave up when the new insurance company gave me a 30 page document to get my medical history. They asked for specific dates of doctors visits, reason, any medication taken and specific amounts of each medication and dates taken for the past 5 years. It was asked in a such a specific way that unless you’ve been keeping a special medical journal or excel sheet of every visit and every medicine you’ve taken, there was no way for a person to not make a mistake. And we all know any mistake on those is an excuse for them to drop you when you get sick.

Can you remember the dates of every doctors visit for last 5 years and how many milligrams of each medication you have taken?

And why is insurance company exempt from Anti-trust laws?

At this point I want to start a movement to take health care benefits away from all federal and local government employees.

Hey, why not? They should do just fine in Indivisual market as long as HSA accounts gets expanded right? If it’s good enough for me, it should be good enough for government employees.

We want small government, right? I’m sure this would help a lot to reduce federal & local government budget deficit.

Oh by the way, I pay Taxes on my Insurance cost so why is it big deal to tax employer provided insurance?

[LA Reader]

[quote=
So let me try again:
If the ones without coverage today and cannot afford coverage today, how does this bill make it more affordable in the future?[/quote]

It doesn’t now that everything that would’ve made it cheaper was taken out by “Moderate Democrats”.

It’s a huge Hand out bill to the insurance industry. Taking Tax dollar and requiring everyone to have insurance. The reform made sense when it contained public option to force insurance company to compete against cheaper alternative. But now this bill would deliver additional 30 million customers to insurance companies and allow them to charge them whatever they want.

In the end, true health care reform will only happen when the cost becomes so large that even large corporations and government have to drop medical insurance as part of benefit package.

Meanwhile, people like me who has to buy my insurance in indivisual market will continue to face price increase of 25% to 40% every year, reduced coverage and constant fear of being dropped whenever we get seriously sick or injured. I do not go to doctors since every little visit will be counted against my premium increase for the future or step towards becoming un-insurable. I tried changing my insurance a year ago and I gave up when the new insurance company gave me a 30 page document to get my medical history. They asked for specific dates of doctors visits, reason, any medication taken and specific amounts of each medication and dates taken for the past 5 years. It was asked in a such a specific way that unless you’ve been keeping a special medical journal or excel sheet of every visit and every medicine you’ve taken, there was no way for a person to not make a mistake. And we all know any mistake on those is an excuse for them to drop you when you get sick.

Can you remember the dates of every doctors visit for last 5 years and how many milligrams of each medication you have taken?

And why is insurance company exempt from Anti-trust laws?

At this point I want to start a movement to take health care benefits away from all federal and local government employees.

Hey, why not? They should do just fine in Indivisual market as long as HSA accounts gets expanded right? If it’s good enough for me, it should be good enough for government employees.

We want small government, right? I’m sure this would help a lot to reduce federal & local government budget deficit.

Oh by the way, I pay Taxes on my Insurance cost so why is it big deal to tax employer provided insurance?

[LA Reader]

[quote=
So let me try again:
If the ones without coverage today and cannot afford coverage today, how does this bill make it more affordable in the future?[/quote]

It doesn’t now that everything that would’ve made it cheaper was taken out by “Moderate Democrats”.

It’s a huge Hand out bill to the insurance industry. Taking Tax dollar and requiring everyone to have insurance. The reform made sense when it contained public option to force insurance company to compete against cheaper alternative. But now this bill would deliver additional 30 million customers to insurance companies and allow them to charge them whatever they want.

In the end, true health care reform will only happen when the cost becomes so large that even large corporations and government have to drop medical insurance as part of benefit package.

Meanwhile, people like me who has to buy my insurance in indivisual market will continue to face price increase of 25% to 40% every year, reduced coverage and constant fear of being dropped whenever we get seriously sick or injured. I do not go to doctors since every little visit will be counted against my premium increase for the future or step towards becoming un-insurable. I tried changing my insurance a year ago and I gave up when the new insurance company gave me a 30 page document to get my medical history. They asked for specific dates of doctors visits, reason, any medication taken and specific amounts of each medication and dates taken for the past 5 years. It was asked in a such a specific way that unless you’ve been keeping a special medical journal or excel sheet of every visit and every medicine you’ve taken, there was no way for a person to not make a mistake. And we all know any mistake on those is an excuse for them to drop you when you get sick.

Can you remember the dates of every doctors visit for last 5 years and how many milligrams of each medication you have taken?

And why is insurance company exempt from Anti-trust laws?

At this point I want to start a movement to take health care benefits away from all federal and local government employees.

Hey, why not? They should do just fine in Indivisual market as long as HSA accounts gets expanded right? If it’s good enough for me, it should be good enough for government employees.

We want small government, right? I’m sure this would help a lot to reduce federal & local government budget deficit.

Oh by the way, I pay Taxes on my Insurance cost so why is it big deal to tax employer provided insurance?

[LA Reader]

[quote=
So let me try again:
If the ones without coverage today and cannot afford coverage today, how does this bill make it more affordable in the future?[/quote]

It doesn’t now that everything that would’ve made it cheaper was taken out by “Moderate Democrats”.

It’s a huge Hand out bill to the insurance industry. Taking Tax dollar and requiring everyone to have insurance. The reform made sense when it contained public option to force insurance company to compete against cheaper alternative. But now this bill would deliver additional 30 million customers to insurance companies and allow them to charge them whatever they want.

In the end, true health care reform will only happen when the cost becomes so large that even large corporations and government have to drop medical insurance as part of benefit package.

Meanwhile, people like me who has to buy my insurance in indivisual market will continue to face price increase of 25% to 40% every year, reduced coverage and constant fear of being dropped whenever we get seriously sick or injured. I do not go to doctors since every little visit will be counted against my premium increase for the future or step towards becoming un-insurable. I tried changing my insurance a year ago and I gave up when the new insurance company gave me a 30 page document to get my medical history. They asked for specific dates of doctors visits, reason, any medication taken and specific amounts of each medication and dates taken for the past 5 years. It was asked in a such a specific way that unless you’ve been keeping a special medical journal or excel sheet of every visit and every medicine you’ve taken, there was no way for a person to not make a mistake. And we all know any mistake on those is an excuse for them to drop you when you get sick.

Can you remember the dates of every doctors visit for last 5 years and how many milligrams of each medication you have taken?

And why is insurance company exempt from Anti-trust laws?

At this point I want to start a movement to take health care benefits away from all federal and local government employees.

Hey, why not? They should do just fine in Indivisual market as long as HSA accounts gets expanded right? If it’s good enough for me, it should be good enough for government employees.

We want small government, right? I’m sure this would help a lot to reduce federal & local government budget deficit.

Oh by the way, I pay Taxes on my Insurance cost so why is it big deal to tax employer provided insurance?

[Author]

Posts