Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Fair Share law a Trojan horse
Waterbury Republican-American ^ | January 18, 2006 | Editorial

Posted on 01/18/2006 10:18:18 AM PST by Graybeard58

If politicians owned companies and ran them the way they run their governments, they'd be out of business in short order. Reckless and impulsive, they are famous for spending wastefully, charging too much for what they deliver and maxing out their credit lines, and then having the gall to dictate repeatedly how private businesses should be run.

Overriding a gubernatorial veto, Maryland lawmakers last week passed the Fair Share Health Care law, which orders companies with 10,000 or more workers to spend 8 percent of their payrolls on employee health benefits or put equivalent sums in the state Med-icaid fund.

This law is an unsubtle shot at Wal-Mart, the bane of unions and others who believe profits are evil health-care insurance is an entitlement. Among their allies is WakeUpWalMart.com, which is dedicated to "changing the way Wal-Mart" does business by substituting failed socialism for spectacularly successful capitalism.

Wal-Mart won't abandon Maryland over this, but it certainly will be less eager to expand there, and it will have to restructure its work force and rework its employment practices. Layoffs, hiring and wage freezes, and job losses for lower-income workers will be among the consequences. Price increases also are possible.

The law also will hamper economic development by sending a message to large employers that labor-loving legislators are gunning for them. This law is bad for business, but worse for low-wage workers.

All this is relevant to Connecticut because it will be one of the 30 states where Fair Share will be introduced this year.

Recall last year how our socialist legislature failed to approve an anti-jobs bill that would have taxed employers of 20 or more if their health benefits were not as generous as those of state employees. A bill more specifically targeting Wal-Mart would have a better of passage chance in a state renowned for its anti-business attitude.

Fair Share is the first step toward forcing businesses to bestow costly public-employee-style benefits on all their workers. Once enacted, the law can be amended to capture smaller companies, dictate coverage throughout the private sector and increase the amounts companies must spend on insurance.

Politicians may be horrendous fiscal administrators, but they are skilled incrementalists.

America is overdue for a sane, comprehensive discussion of health-care reform. Fair Share only makes a bad situation worse and hurts the very people it is supposed to help.


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Editorial
KEYWORDS: fairshare; marxism; socializedmedicine; walmart
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-74 last
To: Realism
Be realistic. Do your kids claim their allowance at income tax time?

So you really didn't mean "anyone that employ"...

You meant only certain employers. Which is where we are now. But you still didn't answer "why?"...

The employer carries liability insurance to protect himself and his business.

I'm sure then that you would agree that employers who do pay most if not all of an employee's health insurance, should have a say in the employee's hobbies, extracurricular activities, speeding tickets, smoking, eating, etc...
61 posted on 01/18/2006 2:06:31 PM PST by darbymcgill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]

To: Iscool
Nope...Without Wal Mart paid benefits, you and I pay for state sponsored health care for these people whether we shop at Wal Mart or not..

Again, I'll ask you, will you pay less or more if Wal-Mart didn't provide the jobs at all? Will you reply again, as you did before that:

Wal Mart is selling products that other American retailers used to sell to Americans, made by Americans

Thereby implying that if only Mom and Pop still employed these folks they would somehow get generous benefits that you as a tax payer wouldn't have to pay for.

Nope...Without Wal Mart paid benefits, you and I pay for state sponsored health care for these people whether we shop at Wal Mart or not..

Why just Wal-Mart? Why not all the employers in the country?

62 posted on 01/18/2006 2:10:36 PM PST by Graybeard58 (Remember and pray for Sgt. Matt Maupin - MIA/POW- Iraq since 04/09/04)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies]

To: Graybeard58
Thereby implying that if only Mom and Pop still employed these folks they would somehow get generous benefits that you as a tax payer wouldn't have to pay for.

A lot of the junk Wal Mart sells comes from factories in China 'owned' by Wal Mart...I'm not talking just the store clerks...Thousands of Americans use to build the products that the chinese Wal Mart employees now build...

63 posted on 01/18/2006 2:17:33 PM PST by Iscool (Start your own revolution by voting for the candidates the media (and gov't) tells you cannot win.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]

To: Iscool
Thousands of Americans use to build the products that the chinese Wal Mart employees now build..

That problem goes way beyond Wal-Mart. Look around in Lowes, Penny's, Sears etc.

China's low wage structure is putting a crimp on Mexico, whose wages used to be the lowest and Japan whose wages used to be the lowest and the list goes on.

China has what other countries do not and that is billions of people and that makes them cheap.

64 posted on 01/18/2006 2:22:55 PM PST by Graybeard58 (Remember and pray for Sgt. Matt Maupin - MIA/POW- Iraq since 04/09/04)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies]

To: Iscool
Without Wal Mart paid benefits, you and I pay for state sponsored health care for these people whether we shop at Wal Mart or not...

Oh... so the people who shop at Wal Mart are paying higher so that the non-Wal Mart shoppers don't have to pay higher taxes? Is that right?

Ok.... and how about we have a hurricane tax in the gulf coast and part of the eastern sea board... mmmmm let's see, a tornado tax in the midwest (higher rates in TX and OK of course), a wild fire and mudslide tax in CA.... you may be on to something here...

Better yet, why not just have people pay their own way.... I don't get it....
65 posted on 01/18/2006 2:23:30 PM PST by darbymcgill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies]

To: Iscool
Thousands of Americans use to build the products that the chinese Wal Mart employees now build...

And why do you think that happened?
66 posted on 01/18/2006 2:27:46 PM PST by darbymcgill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies]

To: darbymcgill
Better yet, why not just have people pay their own way.... I don't get it....

At a part time job at 8-10 bucks an hour, people can't pay...It's that simple...Either we as taxpayers pay, or Wal Mart pays...So what makes more sense to you???

67 posted on 01/18/2006 2:31:38 PM PST by Iscool (Start your own revolution by voting for the candidates the media (and gov't) tells you cannot win.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies]

To: Iscool
At a part time job at 8-10 bucks an hour, people can't pay...It's that simple...Either we as taxpayers pay, or Wal Mart pays..

Why are those the only two options...

If people refused to work at Wal Mart for the wages and "benefits" offered, Wal Mart would have two options: Raise the wages and/or benefits, or go out of business... simple as that... there are other jobs to be had besides Wal Mart, strange as that may seem to you...

Wal Mart is owned by the share holders... If the managers of Wal Mart were not maximizing the shareholder's investments, they would be fired. It is their job to make money.

It is the job of the employee to maximize their investments as well. If you can't afford your current or anticipated life style on a Wal Mart salary, work somewhere else or change your life style.... If the government wasn't passing out free health care, where do you think the employees would go?
68 posted on 01/18/2006 2:39:38 PM PST by darbymcgill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies]

To: Gabz
I agree, in addition to being ridiculous, it's part of the cause of the problem. If more people had to pay for their own health care/insurance you wouldn't see cost rising so quickly.
69 posted on 01/18/2006 5:48:33 PM PST by nh1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]

To: Iscool; darbymcgill; Graybeard58
At a part time job at 8-10 bucks an hour, people can't pay...It's that simple...

UHM.......are you really even paying atention to what you are writing? How many part-time jobs have you had in your life that offered you benefits?

Either we as taxpayers pay, or Wal Mart pays...So what makes more sense to you???

I don't agree with socialized medicine, which you appear to support, but you are forgetting that these people ARE working and therefore are ALSO taxpayers............sheesh.

70 posted on 01/18/2006 8:12:49 PM PST by Gabz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies]

To: nh1
If more people had to pay for their own health care/insurance you wouldn't see cost rising so quickly.

Truer words could not be said.

We pay a good amount of money every month for our share of the insurance we have through my husband's employer, we rarely use it, but it's there when we need it. That is why it is called insurance. Just like the homeowners insurance premium I have to go pay tomorrow, haven't made any claims, but who knows what havoc could happen during the next wind, rain, or snow storm we get. And I won't even mention the problem there seems to be in this county with arson fires of late.

71 posted on 01/18/2006 8:25:25 PM PST by Gabz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies]

To: camle

Or lay off enough in-state workers and bring in employees from out of state to work stores in towns near the various state lines (Delaware, Pennsylvania, Virginia, and West Virginia) those employees are not covered by the law.


72 posted on 01/18/2006 11:25:40 PM PST by Schwaeky ("Truth is not determined by a majority vote." Pope Benedict XVI)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: darbymcgill
I'm sure then that you would agree that employers who do pay most if not all of an employee's health insurance, should have a say in the employee's hobbies, extracurricular activities, speeding tickets, smoking, eating, etc...

Maybe we should all be required to drop a DNA sample to the insurance co. so they can test for genetic defects to calculate risk.

Is it any wonder why people are dropping insurance coverage? Some employers even give incentive to drop. Meanwhile as less pay in to the system coverage gets more and more expensive. We need to break this cycle leading us to national health care now.

73 posted on 01/19/2006 5:45:52 AM PST by Realism (Some believe that the facts-of-life are open to debate.....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies]

To: Realism
Is it any wonder why people are dropping insurance coverage?

Why should they pay for it when it's given away?

We need to break this cycle leading us to national health care now.

I couldn't agree more... But I don't think we can do that by forcing certain people to pay for someone else's health care...
74 posted on 01/19/2006 12:46:54 PM PST by darbymcgill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 73 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-74 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson