Link?
http://www.forbes.com/sites/erikkai...thcare-waivers-are-in-nancy-pelosis-district/
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/vi...ers_to_1800_firms_theyre_small_companies.html
"They're small. I couldn't speak to all 1,800 of them, but some of the lists that I have seen have been very, very small companies. They will not have a big impact on the economy of our country." - Nancy Pelosi
Don't act like a child. I know it plays well with your pals but combining the results of two elections to make the numbers look better? Really? How in the world could anyone take you seriously? Using EC numbers like that's a mandate of some kind? I may disagree with virtually everything you say but you're smarter than this. Or maybe not...lol. Obama has been elected by a combined majority of 12.6M votes over 2 elections, over 3.1M in this election despite basically 8% average unemployment (oh, and people don't blame him for it, including many Repubs, because they remember when the shit hit the fan). Elected by 126 electoral votes this election and 318 electoral votes overall in the last 2 elections combined, despite arguably the most divided electorate in our history.
Sorry, kid, America doesn't want the stanky shit you're selling.
Oh really?
BUMP
Nope, been unemployed for a little under 4 years.
And all the new jobs in Manassas seem to be going to illegals.
Did you notice that Pelosi is a crony capitalist scumbag?Interesting. Did you read that they're temporary waivers? Only good annually by re-applying and only through 2014.
Did you notice that Pelosi is a crony capitalist scumbag?
You are correct.Yeah, I don't care for Pelosi at all.
But that doesn't answer my question.
Blaming is a GREAT coping mechanism.
Umm, I'm obsessed with race? I just looked down at the comments to see peoples' thoughts on the article and that was the first set of comments I saw. I actually read ALL the comments. I just found it interesting that the first 4 comments on the page would have something to do with race.
But of course, It's ME who has the issue with race.
I'm not dodging anything...I agreed with you ffs.Gotcha.
Weave and dodge!
Gosh, this must be the first time the Federal Government has done something like this right?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consolidated_Omnibus_Budget_Reconciliation_Act_of_1985
Obamacare mandates better insurance than many employers can afford to provide and also certain freebies, so their only practical choice is to lay off. Honestly, once the state exchanges are set up such employers may well drop insurance altogether. Then there might not be as much reason to use part time employees.
Interesting. Did you read that they're temporary waivers? Only good annually by re-applying and only through 2014.
I'm not dodging anything...I agreed with you ffs.
The problem with that thinking is that the ACA doesn't allow for the existing waivers. Any waivers granted by the President or Secretary are unilateral decisions on enforcement. As such, there is nothing holding their feet to the fire on the 2014 expiration. In fact, we can already see the administration waffling as the waivers were originally granted on a year-by-year basis and now they are just blanket waivers through 2014.
You posted the random FB about it bro. You have an issue with race esp. since you commented on it in the same way.
Random FB? How is it that I have an issue with race..but half the time you guys post your anti-obama shit here, I can easily scroll down to the comment section and see inflammatory shit written by people who have a problem with race?
That's hilarious.
Yeah, COBRA is really nothing like the employer shared responsibility mandate.
Add in that employers are no longer allowed to cover an employee only and their expenses will skyrocket. Currently employers are allowed to exclude dependents and come 2014 if that had continued they could foist them on to the exchange to receive subsidized coverage. However, the ACA prevents spouses from electing 'married - filing separately' as their tax status to receive a subsidy, so the ACA forces employers to cover dependents. The ACA also forces employers to cover at least 50% of the dependents' premium costs. Adding dependents could cause an employer's insurance cost to go up 200-300% on average, without even considering any of the other cost increase triggers.
The problem with that thinking is that the ACA doesn't allow for the existing waivers. Any waivers granted by the President or Secretary are unilateral decisions on enforcement. As such, there is nothing holding their feet to the fire on the 2014 expiration. In fact, we can already see the administration waffling as the waivers were originally granted on a year-by-year basis and now they are just blanket waivers through 2014.
Don't act like a child. I know it plays well with your pals but combining the results of two elections to make the numbers look better? Really? How in the world could anyone take you seriously? Using EC numbers like that's a mandate of some kind? I may disagree with virtually everything you say but you're smarter than this. Or maybe not...
Obama won. We get it. We've moved on. You're sounding like one of those bitter clingers you disparage.
Obamacare is a paradigm shift for businesses and our economy. I imagine that this is just the tip of the iceberg and that it may take a while to assimilate this change.
Meanwhile...Wall Street was down several hundred points Wednesday and Thursday...flat today.
A simple beefing up of the social safety net using borrowed money from China along with raising the debt limit will make all that pretty painless. It's important to remember that although Obama told us energy prices would skyrocket, it's really for our own good. He knows things we don't. Job losses are just the price we have to pay.People in my industry are getting laid off. That will be the next step for our camp also. The Obama admin has issued less than half the leases of the previous admin.
All of our hourly field people got a 20% pay cut on Wed.