MaggieD
DP Veteran
- Joined
- Jul 9, 2010
- Messages
- 43,244
- Reaction score
- 44,664
- Location
- Chicago Area
- Gender
- Female
- Political Leaning
- Moderate
Sure you do. Obamacare will be implemented in 2014 and goddesses live forever
For moral, economic, and practical reasons.Why is that? Why it is an employers responsibility to ensure that people have healthcare?
For moral, economic, and practical reasons.
From a morality standpoint, your question is like asking why is it an employer's responsibility to ensure that workers can afford food or housing? Why does an employer have any responsibility to pay workers anything?
It all comes down to the value the workers are providing, and morally how that value should be divided. If an employer is making enough money from the effort of his workers to pay not only the employer's own reasonable needs (e.g. other costs, and if the employer is an individual, his own food, shelter, healthcare, etc.) but additionally his workers' healthcare, I think he has a moral duty to provide it, rather than take that money as an additional bonus for himself or his investors.
But even putting aside the more contentious morality question, which I'm sure you disagree with, there is still...
1. Employers will do better if their employees don't get sick often and have to take off work (or worse).
2. Employers will do better if the country as a whole is healthy and less worried about future health-related financial costs.
I know, I was responding to the question of why employers who are capable should have to pay workers a sufficient rate for them to go out and get food, healthcare, etc. As I said in a previous post, I find requiring employers to directly provide healthcare plans to workers pointless and likely inefficient.By 2014, they can get it readily outside the 4 walls of the company. Employees do better if they have food too, but businesses do not have to buy their groceries for them.
I know, I was responding to the question of why employers who are capable should have to pay workers a sufficient rate for them to go out and get food, healthcare, etc. As I said in a previous post, I find requiring employers to directly provide healthcare plans to workers pointless and likely inefficient.
But rereading my last post I see there is one sentence that should have been phrased better.
I generally agree with you, I think this is a good post.The rate at which an employer compensates for labor is based on the value of that work. The employer must offer only enough to meet the legal minimum wage or enough more to attract/retain qualified applicants. Not all jobs offered are intended to attract the "head of household", entry level positions are not intended to be permanent or to pay a "living wage". It is foolish to expect any McJob to offer a living wage or for the gov't to make it into one via social welfare programs. You often only get what you pay for and only pay what you get for.
Should businesses be forced to offer healthcare to all full time employees? Why or why not?
I dont think they should.
Freedom does not mean forcing things upon people. I believe in freedom.
This type of regulation discourages hiring, giving hours, and even bringing jobs back or enticing foreign companies to bring jobs here.
Please dont turn this thread into an pro vs anti obamacare thread. Focus on the subject. Obamacare is about much more than just this.
For moral, economic, and practical reasons.
From a morality standpoint, your question is like asking why is it an employer's responsibility to ensure that workers can afford food or housing? Why does an employer have any responsibility to pay workers anything?
It all comes down to the value the workers are providing, and morally how that value should be divided. If an employer is making enough money from the effort of his workers to pay not only the employer's own reasonable needs (e.g. other costs, and if the employer is an individual, his own food, shelter, healthcare, etc.) but additionally his workers' healthcare
, I think he has a moral duty to pay the worker that money, rather than take it as an additional bonus for himself or his investors.
1. Employers will do better if their employees don't get sick often and have to take off work (or worse).
2. Employers will do better if the country as a whole is healthy and less worried about future health-related financial costs.
Should businesses be forced to offer healthcare to all full time employees? Why or why not?
I dont think they should.
Freedom does not mean forcing things upon people. I believe in freedom.
This type of regulation discourages hiring, giving hours, and even bringing jobs back or enticing foreign companies to bring jobs here./QUOTE]
I say no, for the very reasons you described, yet at the same time, I think healthcare is a basic human right, especially in modern society. It's sort of sticky situation.
However, to the companies that deny health coverage for their employees, I wish them luck finding quality workers.
(Reuters) - Samsung Electronics Co, Sharp Corp and five other makers of liquid crystal displays agreed to pay more than $553 million to settle consumer and state regulatory claims that they conspired to fix prices for LCD panels in televisions, notebook computers and monitors.
The problem with something covering "catastrophic" is that emergency care is the most expensive part of healthcare, part of the reason why single payer countries can spend less than we do is preventative care, not emergency care.I think business should pay no health care costs, that we should instead go single payer on catastrophic, eliminate the corporate tax, and eliminate the capital gains tax on investors who invest directly in a company's ipo. How many people do you see who want single payer plus zero corporate rate and zero capital gains tax on ipo.
My tax code that gets ignored by think tanks everywhere!
Scrap the entire tax code and start from scratch. Below will be the sole tax code; no deductions(I only tax income so obviously deductions for business costs), no joint filing, no payroll taxes.
0-$200,000 10% income tax rate no deductions
200,000-1,000,000 20% income tax rate no deductions
1,000,000 and above 30% income tax rate no deductions
0% corporate income tax rate
0% capital gains rates on ipo when a company tries to raise capital, all other capital gains taxed liked personal income at the regular 10%-20%-30% income tax rates
single payer public health insurance that covers solely catastrophic
Should businesses be forced to offer healthcare to all full time employees? Why or why not?
I dont think they should.
Freedom does not mean forcing things upon people. I believe in freedom.
This type of regulation discourages hiring, giving hours, and even bringing jobs back or enticing foreign companies to bring jobs here.
Please dont turn this thread into an pro vs anti obamacare thread. Focus on the subject. Obamacare is about much more than just this.
NO! This is another one of Obama's "brilliant ideas" that end up making the country even worse than it was before. Part of being free is not being told how you need to run your business!
Not if they give money to Obama and Democrats. Then they are exempt. That's how it works.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?