Recommended Posts
Lindsey 0
QuoteQuoteQuoteI hired a fat chick with some health problems to work for me....because she's good at her job. She's so good that I was willing to absorb some extra cost. My other employees are going to absorb some extra cost too. But she's good enough at what she does to make it worthwhile, I believe.
The extra cost of best qualified employees is often justified.
I'd much rather make sure people who work for me have adequate healthcare than to wish for "universal" healthcare. I'm guessing that's a government-run healthcare system. Ugh.
One only needs to compare the cost:benefit ratio of the United States' healthcare system to that of the rest of the developed western world to recognize that socialized healthcare is not the bogeyman it's so often made out to be. Having said that, I think Hillary's proposed system is the best and most cost effective healthcare reform proposal by any of the candidates.
What's the cost/benefit ratio of the people dying while they wait for a dialysis or angioplasty slot in those socialized healthcare countries...how's that work out for them?
Nutshell: If someone ELSE is paying for your groceries, you're not going to buy ground chuck, you're going to buy T-bones.
If you think the government ISN'T going to ration the supply of steak, you're living in a dream world.
I tend to opt for individualized health care over the cost:benefit ratio myself. :)
Seems appropriate.
linz
A conservative is just a liberal who's been mugged. A liberal is just a conservative who's been to jail
Quote
QuoteBut since you insist on digging your own grave:
"Again, I think positive incentives would be more effective, such as decreasing initial salaries by a small percentage, and giving employees the opportunity to earn that money back by demonstrating a healthy lifestyle"
Notice how I didn't advocate taking anything away. I advocated lowering the starting salary of new employees, and then using the salary difference to fund incentives. That doesn't take anything away from anyone. You can't take away something that someone doesn't have.
Anyone else buying this horseshit?
Maybe you can explain how giving people a lower starting salary isn't taking away from them.
They used to do this sort of thing with women and blacks. "You can't take away something that someone doesn't have." HA!
I'll retract on the illegal thought- smokers, fatties, motorcyclists, and skydivers aren't protected classes. However, I foresee a day where the courts or the Feds finally have to step in and ban arbitrary penalties against employees engaging in legal activities. Maybe it will happen when companies try to do genetic screening of potential employees.
Lindsey 0
I'd NEVER get a knee replacement in Canada. But my orthopod is looking at new procedures to make this less costly to me in the long run. I have private health insurance, and he knows that what it won't cover I will. So I'll get releif since I live here, where my health insurance is a privitized plan. Some places this would be seen as elective because even though I hurt, my knee ain't broke. The wait would be looooong. I'd get fat and debilitated before it was fixed....and then I wouldn't have a choice in which way it was fixed. I'd automatically get the cheaper version. I like the idea of choice and getting fixed quick. But that's just me.
linz
A conservative is just a liberal who's been mugged. A liberal is just a conservative who's been to jail
mnealtx 0
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706
I only have a ten person sample, so its not statistically significant, but my smokers take dramatically more sick days than my non-smokers. They take more breaks and they waste significantly more time during the day.
I never cared before, which is why I hired them. I don't much care about the medical costs. Nonsmokers are more productive.
As a private employer, how is it not my right to say that? If its not a protected class, I can restrict my labour pool any way I want. If I ONLY wanted to hire left-handed rockclimbing teetotaling skydivers with long hair, that's my business. If I can't find any, that's my problem.
jcd11235 0
QuoteIf someone ELSE is paying for your groceries, you're not going to buy ground chuck, you're going to buy T-bones.
If you think the government ISN'T going to ration the supply of steak, you're living in a dream world.
To use your steak vs. ground chuck analogy, steak is already being rationed in the US by insurance companies and HMO's.
jcd11235 0
QuoteAnyone else buying this horseshit?
Maybe you can explain how giving people a lower starting salary isn't taking away from them.
If your next employer decided yesterday that effective immediately, all new hires will be hired at a salary 5% less than current employees are being hired at, that is not taking anything from you. It is simply not giving you something. Your sense of entitlement doesn't count.
Did you get that writer's handbook ordered yet, Shakespeare?
mnealtx 0
QuoteQuoteIf someone ELSE is paying for your groceries, you're not going to buy ground chuck, you're going to buy T-bones.
If you think the government ISN'T going to ration the supply of steak, you're living in a dream world.
To use your steak vs. ground chuck analogy, steak is already being rationed in the US by insurance companies and HMO's.
Yes, it is, to a degree. You think that once the government takes over that it's going to be better? There's going to be more steaks? You live in Cali, right? How'd Grey's price-fixing on energy work out for y'all?
MY guess is that the cattle ranchers will find other lines of work, once they realize that they're fucked over even MORE by the gov't fixing the price on steak.
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706
jcd11235 0
QuoteYou live in Cali, right?
Nope. I'd probably like it better than Florida, though.
QuoteMY guess is that the cattle ranchers will find other lines of work, once they realize that they're fucked over even MORE by the gov't fixing the price on steak.
Guess all you'd like.
QuoteQuoteAnyone else buying this horseshit?
Maybe you can explain how giving people a lower starting salary isn't taking away from them.
If your next employer decided yesterday that effective immediately, all new hires will be hired at a salary 5% less than current employees are being hired at, that is not taking anything from you.
But that's not the situation. All new smoking employees are being hired at 95%. The rest are being paid the full rate. Review that note about women and minorities again.
jcd11235 0
QuoteBut that's not the situation. All new smoking employees are being hired at 95%. The rest are being paid the full rate. Review that note about women and minorities again.
Perhaps in your scenario, but not in the one I proposed.
In the one I proposed, all new hires are hired at 95%, and all new hires are eligible receive healthy lifestyle bonuses if they qualify (i.e. meet healthy lifestyle requirements). Employees would be able to choose whether or not to seek those bonuses. It's positive incentive, not negative incentive. Of course, optimumly, the unearned bonus monies would be spent covering extra costs due to unhealthy lifestyles, and, hopefully, meaningful education/opportunities to adopt more healthy lifestyles.
Nice misdirect about women and minorities. Women are born women, transsexuals notwithstanding, and minorities are typically born minorities. That's completely different from choosing to be a smoker, meat eater, etc.
Andy9o8 0
QuoteQuote
Why should vegetarians have to pay more for their health insurance because their co-worker eats red meat & bratwurst and is more likely to have heart disease?
I think you got that one backwards - why should the meat eaters pay more to make up for the pasty anemic vegans who have lower energy levels?
Why should sensible flat-worlders have to tolerate people who foolishly think that the world is round? Everyone (who is anyone) knows the world is flat.
rehmwa 2
QuoteMaybe you can explain how giving people a lower starting salary isn't taking away from them.
are you kidding? the words "starting salary" clearly explain it
because they can turn down the job offer and apply elsewhere
"taking away" would be to give a salary, then later reduce it involuntarily
these are completely different things
...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants
My personal experience is: many of the vegetarians that I know get ill frequently & have low energy levels compared to the norm. I believe that humans have evolved to be omnivores, not strict herbivores. Just my experience.
Sorry for the thread hijack.
--------------------------------------------------
I think you got that one backwards - why should the meat eaters pay more to make up for the pasty anemic vegans who have lower energy levels?
Share this post
Link to post
Share on other sites