Anyone have an example of any function or industry taken over by the federal government that is not inefficient, costly, poorly-managed, and in financial trouble?Look at the US Post Office, AmTrak, the VA, just to name a few. Socializing medicine is not the answer, free market competition across state lines and tort reform would be a better idea.
Pleasing the shareholders comes first for the insurance companies.
AS IT SHOULD.
Enron pleased it's shareholders....up until it didn't.
Companies that treat its employees well typically do quite well for their shareholders.
If memory serves though, didn't they also treat their employees well until just before the house of cards began to collapse?
Just as I don't need the .gov providing for me, I don't need my employer to fill that role either. My employment with them is by mutual agreement. I agree to provide my services in exchange for a compensation package the company provides or I negotiate. I am no more entitled to health care coverage by my employer than I am by the .gov. When/if I get to the point I believe my services are worth more than I am being compensated, I am free to seek a better situation. Obviously, employers are making similar judgements. In today's economy, they simply don't have to offer as extravagant packages to attract and retain employees.
Sounds like your mom's employer is a tool. Alienate good employees to save a couple of bucks. Way to gain employee loyalty.
Insurance premiums have been going up steadily for many years now, without Obamacare. Even without the ACA they would have likely gone up anyway. Even though the ACA will be having an impact on prices, it's not the only factor, by a longshot. Pleasing the shareholders comes first for the insurance companies.
Is it just me, or does every time they try to improve the living standards of US workers it backfires and makes everything worse for us?
Anyone have an example of any function or industry taken over by the federal government that is not inefficient, costly, poorly-managed, and in financial trouble?Look at the US Post Office, AmTrak, the VA, just to name a few. Socializing medicine is not the answer, free market competition across state lines and tort reform would be a better idea.
Exactly. That's why this BS of cutting hours and raising rate to accommodate Obamacare is just a load of BS. It shows what many employers really think about their greatest asset, their employees. Starbucks stands as a shining example of how to actually do things and treat their employees. The rest of these tools are going to get bit in the ass down the road for this type of behaviour.Companies that treat its employees well typically do quite well for their shareholders.
I didn't ask for it. I knew it was going to backfire the minute they started talking about it, but helping the worker was their main selling point.Maybe it's just you, to go along with all the rest who were suckered by this "Affordable Health Care" plan/law. I think a whole lot of us heard what this was really gonna be early on.
You get what you ask for.
Enron pleased it's shareholders....up until it didn't.
Companies that treat its employees well typically do quite well for their shareholders.
I'm glad to see you still fail to find any fault in Obama or any Democrat politico really. You're even blaming those greedy capitalist pigs though Obamacare restricts returns that insurance companies can keep. Thanks for revealing the real face of INGO's so-called "Libertarians."
Exactly. That's why this BS of cutting hours and raising rate to accommodate Obamacare is just a load of BS. It shows what many employers really think about their greatest asset, their employees. Starbucks stands as a shining example of how to actually do things and treat their employees. The rest of these tools are going to get bit in the ass down the road for this type of behaviour.
Exactly. That's why this BS of cutting hours and raising rate to accommodate Obamacare is just a load of BS. It shows what many employers really think about their greatest asset, their employees. Starbucks stands as a shining example of how to actually do things and treat their employees. The rest of these tools are going to get bit in the ass down the road for this type of behaviour.
I agree. I've worked for companies who treat employees like ****, and I've rewarded them in kind by leaving at the first opportunity. I'm not implying that health care is an "entitlement" or that employers should be forced to provide it. I'm saying that it's in a company's best interest to find ways to treat employees well even in rough times.
My current employer has treated its employees well through both kinds of markets since I've been there. Job satisfaction is very important to me. To me, an employer who values its employees is in itself part of the compensation. Even in hard times, the bottom line doesn't mean companies HAVE to treat their employees like ****. Employers can treat their employees well without messing up the bottom line. But that usually takes effort and ingenuity and a regard for people. That's all I'm saying.