Employers looking at health insurance options

[Hugh_Hoy]

On one of the biz shows I occasionally watch on TV (outside of sports I probably watch 1-3 hours weekly), an analyst said that what kills jobs in the U.S. are not wages (union or otherwise). He pointed to an unlevel playing field involving the practices of biz in other countries: not having to pay benefits to its workers; not having to invest in "green" technology or technology which reduces/eliminates environmental hazards; not having to pay the same in taxes; and government loans which are not required to be repaid; and out-right government subsidies; and foreign government manipulation of it's currency. The analyst used China as an example.

 

Conclusion based upon this particular analyst's opinion: it really isn't union/other wages that are causing U.S. industry to lose ground against other countries.

 

Some might call me a heretic here, but I'm all for returning to 30+ years ago when strict tariffs were applied against certain countries and certain commodities. There were reasons for these tariffs, primarily income for the U.S. Treasury and protection of domestic industries (work force).

 

HH

[Flashermac]

It tell you something when companies are moving their factories from Thailand to China ... because it is cheaper!

 

 

[cavanami]

If the USA is not competitive because other countries have no benefits for the employees, then put a stiff import tax on all the products coming in to the USA from those countries!

That should make the USA competitive...but just maybe the big US Corps don't want this as it just might reduce the CEO's bonus!

Of course all the lobbyists would be pounding the DC pavement to get such a tax thrown out!!!

[Old Hippie]

Cav.

 

We cannot put tariffs on shit and demand equal trade, as that is "protectionist" and wrong...well when we do it anyway...

[TheCorinthian]

It tell you something when companies are moving their factories from Thailand to China ... because it is cheaper!

 

 

 

Yep. I totally agree with the need for the 29 and 40 CFRs. But they blast the cost of manufacturing in the US to hell and gone. In China, (And in LOS for that matter) those books just dont exist.

[Steve]

I am a small L libertarian or I profess to be but frankly I'm not sure what I am nowadays. Confused most of the time. Both parties agree that health care in the U.S. is below par. Both parties both agree on that. The Republicans don't like the Democratic plan. I can see that point. I am not sure what the Republican plan is other than some sort of Medical Savings Plan.

Seems a good idea but to be frank I don't see how it solves the problem. I'd love to give it a chance if a supporter of this program on here can explain to me how it would fix things. Really, I'm open to anything at this pont.

 

However, even if its explained and it would solve all our health care woes or most of it will NEVER come to fruition. Why? The problem with ANY government program is that the program is either influenced or outright written by the lobby that it affects. How can we expect good national healthcare when the politicians who design it are beholden to the various medical groups (HMO, AMA, Pharmaceutical companies, etc.)?

It will ALWAYS benefit those who profit from it first and those who are to use it last. At the end of the day BOTH parties are beholded to these groups. No matter how much we all argue the pros and cons of any program it comes back to it being just conversation.

 

Obama's plan may or may not be good but what we got was a plan that was carved up by lobbyists. Maybe his original plan woudn't have worked. We'll never know. We'll never get any real plan.

 

Social welfare was mentioned in this thread. That got greatly reduced from the Clinton bill in the '90s. I dated a cute 23 year old from south central late 90s. 3 kids, 3 different fathers, first one when she was 14 (good thing I had a vasectomy ;-). No more kids. Not because she didn't want any, she didn't see the benefit of it. I helped her write a resume (as sparse as that waas). She ended up liking to work at the time. I told a story here once she didn't need as much food stamps and was being talked into keeping it and she kept saying she didn't like the stares anymore and she didn't need it but they kept trying to tell her 'just in case' sorry, I digress.

 

Yes, there is still some problems but we discuss welfare as if its the same old welfare and it isn't. As far as I know one can't keep having the 8 kids any more and get the same benefits. THere are time limits and reductions from what I understand.

 

As far as the extension of

unemployment benefits. I know people of all types.

 

I know people who work hard and want to work and conversely, I know people who would love to pick up a free government check every month. It was very hard to pick up a free check before the economic crisis. The overwhelming number of people I know who want to work and can't find a job good enough to feed their families (not to mention health benefits) want to work. Badly. They want a good job. There simply isn't anything out there.

Not a knock on those who want to end unemployment checks but I honestly want to know if in your personal circle of friends and people you know if there is anyone out of work and struggling to find GOOD work for their family and they would rather not work and get the check? I can't in my circle of friends. Maybe I know a different class of people. Really. Not joking. I had a brief job managing at a small dot.com a few years ago and they went bust. Through social media (Facebook) I kept in touch with seveal of them. These people were either the co-breadwinners or breadwinners for their family who can't find anything of value other than a couple dollars above minimum wage.

WHen we had the opportunity for overtime at this job, these people readily took it. They came in on Saturdays if there was work on Saturdays and a chance for more money. My rough poll says about half have found a job and that half didn't find a good one either. They found a job that would meet the bills and not much else. Its paycheck to paycheck and god forbid if someone gets sick or injured. From what I hear from just about all my friends, companies know they have you by the balls and working for any company nowadays is tantamount to serfdom or indentured servitude. There are no pay raises, benefits get reduced. You're told not asked to put up with stuff you woulnd't have prior. They know there are litterally 20 people willing to have your job.

 

One of my brothers and as a few others sell stuff on eBay to supplement income. (and the government is going after that now). they are looking at anything that makes money. Back in my old neighborhood, I have heard people who never considerd it before sell weed on the side. They won't touch the heavy stuff (crack) but its gotten that bad. THese are people who were always lawabiding. I couldn't risk it, too much to lose but I'm not living in north Philly so I don't judge. Scoff but given the same sitution I guarantee you it would cross your mind even if you don't do it.

 

The point about the defense budget is right. Rumsfeld actually wanted to reign it in at first then 911 happened. I read an article or two about that. The pentagon generals and admirals were scared of him at first because of that rumor. The USSR is no more. Do we still need troops and bases in Europe? Do we need 28k troops in Korea? Don't tell me our 28k troops is preventing the north from invading the south. Jung is crazy as a fox. China won't let that happen and they know the response would be too great. They'll NEVER invade the south. That opportunity went with the korean war.

 

I digress, I go back to my original point. ALL this talk of which plan is good or bad is just conversation at the end of the day. NOTHING will happen of any good or consequence while lobbyists and groups own the people in power in Congress be it unions, banks, media companies, oil, defense firms, AARP, etc. We are all on here from time to time arguing party politics when its all a smokescreen. Does it matter given they're both owned lock, stock and barrel? If Obama wasn't owned when he started he wised up now. His campaign was flush with money when it looked like he would beat Hillary. Those untold millions wasn't from the masses dropping $10 or $50 in the campaing bucket passed around at rallies.

Big business and the groups saw the future and bought it. Whether he is or not he's governed as a centrist. My guess is he's had to. Liberals are pissed at him because he's a centrist and even if he did whatever the Republicans proposed they'd still hate him because he's a democrat and its about power. Power that comes with sitting at the head of the table. But its not real power. The power is who is paying for it.

 

Have a good day :content: Another chocolat steve picker upper...lol. Damn, I'm a pessimistic prick. I really am an outgoing, happy guy in real life. Really. Those who know me know that. haha

[cavanami]

You are not pessimistic but just being realistic.