What healthcare reform means for you as a skier?
- Thread starter dave...
- Start date
you think Obama is a liberal extremist ? are you kidding? listen to liberal talk shows, much like republican talk shows that's where the extremists are, the only difference is that the liberal talk shows are right imo (imo only say that because i guess i should let the wrong, excuse me conservatives have some room to talk)
if it werent for canada being next to the us and leeching off our technology, you would be a second world country.
the same is true for mexico except they would be third world
if you want to keep living the good life in canada, keep hoping that capitalism survives in america, because if it doesnt, your gonna be earning 20 bucks a day to do whatever the fuck you do
the same is true for mexico except they would be third world
if you want to keep living the good life in canada, keep hoping that capitalism survives in america, because if it doesnt, your gonna be earning 20 bucks a day to do whatever the fuck you do
_CC_
Active member
Obviously Obama is not a liberal extremest, thats stupid. Conservative talk shows are idiotic for the most part and these days, most republican politicians do not take on the views of people like Rush Limbaugh or any other crazy fucks (considering they helped this bill get where it is). just so you know.
My view on this bill, as a skier, and a person who isnt gonna make much money is this: Find a balance of some sort. No one likes welfare hounds, and no one likes being forced to pay for them when they refuse to actually work, but no one likes being unable to afford medical care either.
As cruel as it sounds we might have to toss in a little bit of taboo around welfare and cause americans to consider it as a last resort. The inevitable collapse of the health insurance industry will not be pretty and put a lot of people out of work (possibly leaving them to depend on the system that caused their unemployment.) This industry will probably implode on its own eventually anyway im guessing. Also, tax increases during an economic downfall are very obviously counterproductive.
However from the other side, there are hard working people who are not getting the care they deserve (my father for example pays an absolutely ridiculous amount for benefits from his job and the bills from my brothers broken leg are still insane) and in that sense, it could benefit a lot of people getting screwed by insurance companies (duh). Quality and speed of care will decrease significantly but, fuck we cant make everyone happy now can we?
A bit of a tangent, but something to think about. who the decides if healthcare, or anything else, is a human right that they have the ability to give? If the whoever this is keeps promising rights to everyone, we're going to run out of things to give very quickly.
My view on this bill, as a skier, and a person who isnt gonna make much money is this: Find a balance of some sort. No one likes welfare hounds, and no one likes being forced to pay for them when they refuse to actually work, but no one likes being unable to afford medical care either.
As cruel as it sounds we might have to toss in a little bit of taboo around welfare and cause americans to consider it as a last resort. The inevitable collapse of the health insurance industry will not be pretty and put a lot of people out of work (possibly leaving them to depend on the system that caused their unemployment.) This industry will probably implode on its own eventually anyway im guessing. Also, tax increases during an economic downfall are very obviously counterproductive.
However from the other side, there are hard working people who are not getting the care they deserve (my father for example pays an absolutely ridiculous amount for benefits from his job and the bills from my brothers broken leg are still insane) and in that sense, it could benefit a lot of people getting screwed by insurance companies (duh). Quality and speed of care will decrease significantly but, fuck we cant make everyone happy now can we?
A bit of a tangent, but something to think about. who the decides if healthcare, or anything else, is a human right that they have the ability to give? If the whoever this is keeps promising rights to everyone, we're going to run out of things to give very quickly.
It's amazing to me how good the republicans are at this politics game. when the issue is universal healthcare, limiting legislature equals the loss of civil liberties and unconstitutional, and the end of all things American. When it's the "war on terror", bills that systematically remove rights are simply the price of freedom.
Democrats got it done, for once. We won. Quit whining.
Democrats got it done, for once. We won. Quit whining.
you fucking idiot liberals
ITS ABOUT SPENDING MONEY THAT WE DON'T HAVE
ITS ABOUT SPENDING MONEY THAT WE DON'T HAVE
ITS ABOUT SPENDING MONEY THAT WE DON'T HAVE
ITS ABOUT SPENDING MONEY THAT WE DON'T HAVE
ITS ABOUT SPENDING MONEY THAT WE DON'T HAVE
ITS ABOUT SPENDING MONEY THAT WE DON'T HAVE
ITS ABOUT SPENDING MONEY THAT WE DON'T HAVE
ITS ABOUT SPENDING MONEY THAT WE DON'T HAVE
ITS ABOUT SPENDING MONEY THAT WE DON'T HAVE
ITS ABOUT SPENDING MONEY THAT WE DON'T HAVE
ITS ABOUT SPENDING MONEY THAT WE DON'T HAVE
ITS ABOUT SPENDING MONEY THAT WE DON'T HAVE
ITS ABOUT SPENDING MONEY THAT WE DON'T HAVE
ITS ABOUT SPENDING MONEY THAT WE DON'T HAVE
ITS ABOUT SPENDING MONEY THAT WE DON'T HAVE
ITS ABOUT SPENDING MONEY THAT WE DON'T HAVE
ITS ABOUT SPENDING MONEY THAT WE DON'T HAVE
ITS ABOUT SPENDING MONEY THAT WE DON'T HAVE
ITS ABOUT SPENDING MONEY THAT WE DON'T HAVE
ITS ABOUT SPENDING MONEY THAT WE DON'T HAVE
ITS ABOUT SPENDING MONEY THAT WE DON'T HAVE
ITS ABOUT SPENDING MONEY THAT WE DON'T HAVE
ITS ABOUT SPENDING MONEY THAT WE DON'T HAVE
ITS ABOUT SPENDING MONEY THAT WE DON'T HAVE
ITS ABOUT SPENDING MONEY THAT WE DON'T HAVE
ITS ABOUT SPENDING MONEY THAT WE DON'T HAVE
ITS ABOUT SPENDING MONEY THAT WE DON'T HAVE
ITS ABOUT SPENDING MONEY THAT WE DON'T HAVE
ITS ABOUT SPENDING MONEY THAT WE DON'T HAVE
ITS ABOUT SPENDING MONEY THAT WE DON'T HAVE
ITS ABOUT SPENDING MONEY THAT WE DON'T HAVE
ITS ABOUT SPENDING MONEY THAT WE DON'T HAVE
ITS ABOUT SPENDING MONEY THAT WE DON'T HAVE
ITS ABOUT SPENDING MONEY THAT WE DON'T HAVE
ITS ABOUT SPENDING MONEY THAT WE DON'T HAVE
ITS ABOUT SPENDING MONEY THAT WE DON'T HAVE
ITS ABOUT SPENDING MONEY THAT WE DON'T HAVE
ITS ABOUT SPENDING MONEY THAT WE DON'T HAVE
ITS ABOUT SPENDING MONEY THAT WE DON'T HAVE
ITS ABOUT SPENDING MONEY THAT WE DON'T HAVE
ITS ABOUT SPENDING MONEY THAT WE DON'T HAVE
ITS ABOUT SPENDING MONEY THAT WE DON'T HAVE
ITS ABOUT SPENDING MONEY THAT WE DON'T HAVE
ITS ABOUT SPENDING MONEY THAT WE DON'T HAVE
ITS ABOUT SPENDING MONEY THAT WE DON'T HAVE
ITS ABOUT SPENDING MONEY THAT WE DON'T HAVE
ITS ABOUT SPENDING MONEY THAT WE DON'T HAVE
ITS ABOUT SPENDING MONEY THAT WE DON'T HAVE
ITS ABOUT SPENDING MONEY THAT WE DON'T HAVE
ITS ABOUT SPENDING MONEY THAT WE DON'T HAVE
ITS ABOUT SPENDING MONEY THAT WE DON'T HAVE
ITS ABOUT SPENDING MONEY THAT WE DON'T HAVE
ITS ABOUT SPENDING MONEY THAT WE DON'T HAVE
ITS ABOUT SPENDING MONEY THAT WE DON'T HAVE
ITS ABOUT SPENDING MONEY THAT WE DON'T HAVE
ITS ABOUT SPENDING MONEY THAT WE DON'T HAVE
ITS ABOUT SPENDING MONEY THAT WE DON'T HAVE
ITS ABOUT SPENDING MONEY THAT WE DON'T HAVE
ITS ABOUT SPENDING MONEY THAT WE DON'T HAVE
ITS ABOUT SPENDING MONEY THAT WE DON'T HAVE
ITS ABOUT SPENDING MONEY THAT WE DON'T HAVE
ITS ABOUT SPENDING MONEY THAT WE DON'T HAVE
ITS ABOUT SPENDING MONEY THAT WE DON'T HAVE
ITS ABOUT SPENDING MONEY THAT WE DON'T HAVE
ITS ABOUT SPENDING MONEY THAT WE DON'T HAVE
ITS ABOUT SPENDING MONEY THAT WE DON'T HAVE
ITS ABOUT SPENDING MONEY THAT WE DON'T HAVE
ITS ABOUT SPENDING MONEY THAT WE DON'T HAVE
ITS ABOUT SPENDING MONEY THAT WE DON'T HAVE
ITS ABOUT SPENDING MONEY THAT WE DON'T HAVE
ITS ABOUT SPENDING MONEY THAT WE DON'T HAVE
ITS ABOUT SPENDING MONEY THAT WE DON'T HAVE
ITS ABOUT SPENDING MONEY THAT WE DON'T HAVE
ITS ABOUT SPENDING MONEY THAT WE DON'T HAVE
ITS ABOUT SPENDING MONEY THAT WE DON'T HAVE
ITS ABOUT SPENDING MONEY THAT WE DON'T HAVE
ITS ABOUT SPENDING MONEY THAT WE DON'T HAVE
ITS ABOUT SPENDING MONEY THAT WE DON'T HAVE
ITS ABOUT SPENDING MONEY THAT WE DON'T HAVE
ITS ABOUT SPENDING MONEY THAT WE DON'T HAVE
dweezileast
Active member
all this arguing is too much, anyone care for a spot of tea?
HPskier
Active member
i will say this in another thread...
it is for people like me who are denied by every health care company for a pre existing condition and have to pay for all their medical bills. this bill means i can finally have my back and knee checked out and probably repaired
that is the fundamental reason why this bill was passed and i dont think one of you can argue that
it is for people like me who are denied by every health care company for a pre existing condition and have to pay for all their medical bills. this bill means i can finally have my back and knee checked out and probably repaired
that is the fundamental reason why this bill was passed and i dont think one of you can argue that
your wrong. this bill is projected to reduce our national debt.
It puts our budget and economy on a more stable path by
reducing the deficit by $100 billion over the next ten years – and
about $1 trillion over the second decade – by cutting government
overspending and reining in waste, fraud and abuse.
found herehttp://www.whitehouse.gov/Issues/health-Care
It puts our budget and economy on a more stable path by
reducing the deficit by $100 billion over the next ten years – and
about $1 trillion over the second decade – by cutting government
overspending and reining in waste, fraud and abuse.
found herehttp://www.whitehouse.gov/Issues/health-Care
found herehttp://www.whitehouse.gov/Issues/health-Care
HAHA yeah whitehouse.gov might be a little biased
thats like going to hitlers nazi website in germany and getting a fucking opinion on jews
your like a brainwashed little kid
HAHA yeah whitehouse.gov might be a little biased
thats like going to hitlers nazi website in germany and getting a fucking opinion on jews
your like a brainwashed little kid
fine you want another source okay.
http://www.newsweek.com/id/235246 try here they explain the idea behind the health care bill in words that you can probably understand.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/18/health/policy/18health.html here is another.
here is another little excerpt and if you really want me to dig up the CBO's official report i will.
Congress’s budgetary scorekeeper affirms that the Senate’s healthcare
reform legislation adheres to President Barack Obama’s pledge to spend
less than $900 billion and reduce the federal budget deficit through
the bill, which would extend health insurance coverage to 31 million
people.
found:http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/73079-cbo-health-bill-spends-871b-reduces-deficit-by-132b
http://www.newsweek.com/id/235246 try here they explain the idea behind the health care bill in words that you can probably understand.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/18/health/policy/18health.html here is another.
here is another little excerpt and if you really want me to dig up the CBO's official report i will.
Congress’s budgetary scorekeeper affirms that the Senate’s healthcare
reform legislation adheres to President Barack Obama’s pledge to spend
less than $900 billion and reduce the federal budget deficit through
the bill, which would extend health insurance coverage to 31 million
people.
found:http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/73079-cbo-health-bill-spends-871b-reduces-deficit-by-132b
selkirks
Active member
Hate to break it to you, but only World War II was able to break us out of the Depression.
And that's when the New Deal was created, spending billions to successfully put Americans back to work. Social Security was established then as well. In essence, the last major social legislation came during the Great Depression.
And that's when the New Deal was created, spending billions to successfully put Americans back to work. Social Security was established then as well. In essence, the last major social legislation came during the Great Depression.
here is the official CBO reports take on the bill:
Estimated Budgetary Impact of the Legislation
CBO and JCT estimate that enacting both pieces of legislation—H.R. 3590
and the reconciliation proposal—would produce a net reduction in federal
deficits of $143 billion over the 2010–2019 period as result of changes in
direct spending and revenues (see Table 1). That figure comprises
$124 billion in net reductions deriving from the health care and revenue
provisions and $19 billion in net reductions deriving from the education
provisions. Approximately $114 billion of the total reduction would be onbudget;
other effects related to Social Security revenues and spending as
well as spending by the U.S. Postal Service are classified as off-budget.
CBO has not completed an estimate of the potential impact of the
legislation on discretionary spending, which would be subject to future
appropriation action.
it can be found here:http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/113xx/doc11379
Estimated Budgetary Impact of the Legislation
CBO and JCT estimate that enacting both pieces of legislation—H.R. 3590
and the reconciliation proposal—would produce a net reduction in federal
deficits of $143 billion over the 2010–2019 period as result of changes in
direct spending and revenues (see Table 1). That figure comprises
$124 billion in net reductions deriving from the health care and revenue
provisions and $19 billion in net reductions deriving from the education
provisions. Approximately $114 billion of the total reduction would be onbudget;
other effects related to Social Security revenues and spending as
well as spending by the U.S. Postal Service are classified as off-budget.
CBO has not completed an estimate of the potential impact of the
legislation on discretionary spending, which would be subject to future
appropriation action.
it can be found here:http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/113xx/doc11379
tthank you, i agree 100%
i hate the idea of paying for people who dont deserve any help at all, especially if its the government making me do it. i know there are some people out there that are good hard working individuals who get screwed by insurance companies, or screwed in another way, and im more than fine with helping those types of people out.
my friends family makes a shit ton of money and they donate something like 30 grand a year to charities, sometimes more, but because his dad is a doctor, he is going to be making ALOT less money, which means little or no money going to charities for people who deserve it, and instead its more than likely going to some fat fuck who's got some health problem cause he eats twinkies and bacon grease all day long.
my parents have a friend who got screwed over, lost his business, his house, he was totally broke, he made plenty of money and worked extremely hard to get to where he was. actually it was because obama decided to control yet another thing which caused him to lose his job. but he got so much money and help from friends and people he knew, and now he's finally starting to do well again because of it, because people liked him, respected him and knew he was a good hard worker.
my point is that people help eachother out, when they need it and DESERVE it.
again i know not everyone who cant afford health care now is a shitty lazy person, but in alot if not most cases it is. and now these people have les motivation to actually try hard and do something with their lives because they know they are just gonna get their ass wiped forever by the government and the real hard workers.
really there are plenty of other countries out there that have a health care system you might like better, you have plenty of choices.
i hate the idea of paying for people who dont deserve any help at all, especially if its the government making me do it. i know there are some people out there that are good hard working individuals who get screwed by insurance companies, or screwed in another way, and im more than fine with helping those types of people out.
my friends family makes a shit ton of money and they donate something like 30 grand a year to charities, sometimes more, but because his dad is a doctor, he is going to be making ALOT less money, which means little or no money going to charities for people who deserve it, and instead its more than likely going to some fat fuck who's got some health problem cause he eats twinkies and bacon grease all day long.
my parents have a friend who got screwed over, lost his business, his house, he was totally broke, he made plenty of money and worked extremely hard to get to where he was. actually it was because obama decided to control yet another thing which caused him to lose his job. but he got so much money and help from friends and people he knew, and now he's finally starting to do well again because of it, because people liked him, respected him and knew he was a good hard worker.
my point is that people help eachother out, when they need it and DESERVE it.
again i know not everyone who cant afford health care now is a shitty lazy person, but in alot if not most cases it is. and now these people have les motivation to actually try hard and do something with their lives because they know they are just gonna get their ass wiped forever by the government and the real hard workers.
really there are plenty of other countries out there that have a health care system you might like better, you have plenty of choices.
-Government
big enough to supply everything you need is big enough to take everything
you have ... The course of history shows that as a government grows,
liberty decreases.
-Most
bad government has grown out of too much government.
-Thomas Jefferson.
good quotes to think about
big enough to supply everything you need is big enough to take everything
you have ... The course of history shows that as a government grows,
liberty decreases.
-Most
bad government has grown out of too much government.
-Thomas Jefferson.
good quotes to think about
lineskier582
Member
haha just because it's going to the supreme court doesn't mean that it's unconstitutional. Do you know what the supremacy clause is? look it up. the supreme court won't overturn 200 years of precedent. states have no say over federal law. i love how one of the most basic aspects of american law is overlooked by almost everyone.
Fischer-Addicted
Active member
Yes because everyone knows that the way you get out of a debt in the 10 trillions is by spending another few trillion by the government... and not the people. liberals are seriously retarded......... it will lose jobs and make american companys go under because you cant compete with the government. therefore increasing our national debt. Stop repeating what you hear your idiot parents say and start realizing the facts.
..jack
Member
Is America not going to keep private hospitals to run alongside state funded ones? In England, if you can afford to go private your seen quickly, have top treatment and are out of hospital in no time. If you can't afford this, you wait a bit longer, but eventually get completely sorted out for free. Although it bs nothing to do with me, I think that the reforms are beneficial to America. I've lived in countries where healthcare isn't free and come across a lot of people who are unable to work because of thier untreated illnesses or injuries. Now i'm sure
J.W.
Member
Saw this in the paper yesterday
Health policy raises red flags at Steamboat Ski Area
Health care employer penalty for large businesses
could cost $2M
By Mike Lawrence
Wednesday, March 24, 2010
Steamboat Springs — Steamboat Ski Area
officials said Tuesday that the federal health care overhaul could cost
their business as much as $2 million a year beginning in 2014.
The health care overhaul includes a policy that would assess a fine,
per employee, to large businesses that do not provide health care to
full-time workers. The policy’s potential impact is ringing alarm bells
with the Colorado ski industry, which has a large number of uninsured
seasonal employees who work enough days to qualify as full-time workers.
“The potential impact to Colorado Ski Country member areas is
somewhere between $9 million and $14 million in penalties (per year),”
Steamboat Ski and Resort Corp. President Chris Diamond said Tuesday,
citing a Colorado Ski Country USA estimate. “It’s a stunning blow to any
large employer like ours that employs seasonal staff.”
Colorado Ski Country is the trade association for 22 Colorado ski and
snowboard resorts. Spokeswoman Jennifer Rudolph cautioned Tuesday that
association staff still is digesting the impacts of the multi-faceted
health care legislation, which includes numerous tax credits and
penalties for businesses of varying sizes. But Rudolph said the
association is very much aware of the employer penalty policy.
“That is something that has raised a red flag with us, and we do have
some concerns as representatives of employers,” Rudolph said. “We do
have folks on our staff who work closely with legislators and policy
makers and have been paying very close attention to the health care
bill.”
Two members of Colorado’s Congressional delegation, U.S. Rep. John
Salazar and U.S. Sen. Mark Udall, said Tuesday that they plan to work
with the state’s ski industry to address its concerns. No specifics were
given.
President Barack Obama signed the Patient Protection and Affordable
Care Act into law Tuesday. A smaller companion bill, the Health Care
& Education Affordability Reconciliation Act, is pending passage by
the U.S. Senate and would modify the larger bill. Together, the two
bills include a policy that requires businesses with more than 50
full-time employees to provide health insurance, or a percentage of its
costs, to each full-time employee. Failure to do so when the policy
takes effect in 2014 would result in the per-employee fine.
The policy would charge Steamboat Ski and Resort Corp. $2,000 for
each seasonal employee who works more than 120 days — thus considered
full-time — and who is not provided health insurance.
Ski Corp. has about 1,000 seasonal employees.
“That’s a $2 million cost to us on an annual basis, where all of a
sudden our expenses just increase,” said Laurie Good, Ski Corp.’s vice
president of financial services. “If we have to foot the bill for $2
million … that’s really going to hurt our business model.”
The actual fine could total less than $2 million annually. The policy
exempts the first 30 employees from the fine assessment, and Ski Corp.
spokesman Mike Lane said Ski Corp. provides health insurance to seasonal
employees in their third year and beyond.
A breakdown of seasonal employees’ longevity was not available
Tuesday.
Diamond said he learned about the employer penalty policy about a
week ago, from Colorado Ski Country. He strongly criticized western
Colorado’s representation in Congress for not blocking the policy.
“It was so tough to get any handle on what was actually going to be
in the bill,” Diamond said about the weeks leading up to its passage.
“I’m terribly disappointed that anybody representing constituents like
us would have let this pass through — it’s beyond understanding.”
Salazar’s staff said Tuesday that they are working with ski areas and
other members of Colorado’s Congressional delegation to address the
policy and its impacts. Udall said the same.
“I appreciate the challenges that any business faces in providing
health coverage to their employees. I think it is vital that we make
providing health coverage as feasible and affordable as possible,” Udall
said Tuesday. “While nearing the end of this current debate, I
recognize the unique seasonal work force needs of ski areas and am
committed to working with them and the (presidential) administration to
make sure ski areas are not put at a disadvantage compared to other
employers.”
The policy’s final language is pending passage of the reconciliation
bill.
Lane said Ski Corp. used to offer health care to seasonal employees
in their first year, but has not done so for several years.
Good noted that Ski Corp. “employees have been at a wage freeze for
two years.”
The employer penalty policy could add to the burden of ski resorts
struggling in the economic recession.
“It’s certainly a very big cause for concern for the Colorado ski
industry,” Good said.
Health policy raises red flags at Steamboat Ski Area
Health care employer penalty for large businesses
could cost $2M
By Mike Lawrence
Wednesday, March 24, 2010
Steamboat Springs — Steamboat Ski Area
officials said Tuesday that the federal health care overhaul could cost
their business as much as $2 million a year beginning in 2014.
The health care overhaul includes a policy that would assess a fine,
per employee, to large businesses that do not provide health care to
full-time workers. The policy’s potential impact is ringing alarm bells
with the Colorado ski industry, which has a large number of uninsured
seasonal employees who work enough days to qualify as full-time workers.
“The potential impact to Colorado Ski Country member areas is
somewhere between $9 million and $14 million in penalties (per year),”
Steamboat Ski and Resort Corp. President Chris Diamond said Tuesday,
citing a Colorado Ski Country USA estimate. “It’s a stunning blow to any
large employer like ours that employs seasonal staff.”
Colorado Ski Country is the trade association for 22 Colorado ski and
snowboard resorts. Spokeswoman Jennifer Rudolph cautioned Tuesday that
association staff still is digesting the impacts of the multi-faceted
health care legislation, which includes numerous tax credits and
penalties for businesses of varying sizes. But Rudolph said the
association is very much aware of the employer penalty policy.
“That is something that has raised a red flag with us, and we do have
some concerns as representatives of employers,” Rudolph said. “We do
have folks on our staff who work closely with legislators and policy
makers and have been paying very close attention to the health care
bill.”
Two members of Colorado’s Congressional delegation, U.S. Rep. John
Salazar and U.S. Sen. Mark Udall, said Tuesday that they plan to work
with the state’s ski industry to address its concerns. No specifics were
given.
President Barack Obama signed the Patient Protection and Affordable
Care Act into law Tuesday. A smaller companion bill, the Health Care
& Education Affordability Reconciliation Act, is pending passage by
the U.S. Senate and would modify the larger bill. Together, the two
bills include a policy that requires businesses with more than 50
full-time employees to provide health insurance, or a percentage of its
costs, to each full-time employee. Failure to do so when the policy
takes effect in 2014 would result in the per-employee fine.
The policy would charge Steamboat Ski and Resort Corp. $2,000 for
each seasonal employee who works more than 120 days — thus considered
full-time — and who is not provided health insurance.
Ski Corp. has about 1,000 seasonal employees.
“That’s a $2 million cost to us on an annual basis, where all of a
sudden our expenses just increase,” said Laurie Good, Ski Corp.’s vice
president of financial services. “If we have to foot the bill for $2
million … that’s really going to hurt our business model.”
The actual fine could total less than $2 million annually. The policy
exempts the first 30 employees from the fine assessment, and Ski Corp.
spokesman Mike Lane said Ski Corp. provides health insurance to seasonal
employees in their third year and beyond.
A breakdown of seasonal employees’ longevity was not available
Tuesday.
Diamond said he learned about the employer penalty policy about a
week ago, from Colorado Ski Country. He strongly criticized western
Colorado’s representation in Congress for not blocking the policy.
“It was so tough to get any handle on what was actually going to be
in the bill,” Diamond said about the weeks leading up to its passage.
“I’m terribly disappointed that anybody representing constituents like
us would have let this pass through — it’s beyond understanding.”
Salazar’s staff said Tuesday that they are working with ski areas and
other members of Colorado’s Congressional delegation to address the
policy and its impacts. Udall said the same.
“I appreciate the challenges that any business faces in providing
health coverage to their employees. I think it is vital that we make
providing health coverage as feasible and affordable as possible,” Udall
said Tuesday. “While nearing the end of this current debate, I
recognize the unique seasonal work force needs of ski areas and am
committed to working with them and the (presidential) administration to
make sure ski areas are not put at a disadvantage compared to other
employers.”
The policy’s final language is pending passage of the reconciliation
bill.
Lane said Ski Corp. used to offer health care to seasonal employees
in their first year, but has not done so for several years.
Good noted that Ski Corp. “employees have been at a wage freeze for
two years.”
The employer penalty policy could add to the burden of ski resorts
struggling in the economic recession.
“It’s certainly a very big cause for concern for the Colorado ski
industry,” Good said.
dave...
Active member
ahaahahahahaha.....sorry buddy you're wrong, Canada is one of the largest exporters of natural resources, energy and man-made materials in the world
without us, you have no steel to build the cars you need to commute to workwithout us, you have no lumber to build your housewithout us, you have no wheat to bake your breadwithout us, you have no building materials to make gyprock and concretewithout us, most of the northern states have no electricity, because we're the largest hydro-electric providers in the world and you're our biggest customer! and guess what, until you guys figure out nuclear fusion, you'll be relying on us for your energy needs for a very long time
oh and we also have some of the largest oil deposits in the world lying in the arctic/oil sands
We're only 30 million people, so we have plenty of resources and jobs to keep us happy with money in our pockets, because plenty of other countries import our goods as well...
so before you go off telling people canada is nothing without the United states, remember that without us, you're an overpopulated, overeating and over-consuming third world country with no resources to support yourselves...
oh yeah, and without us, you don't have any maple syrup to pour onto your pancakes, think about that
without us, you have no steel to build the cars you need to commute to workwithout us, you have no lumber to build your housewithout us, you have no wheat to bake your breadwithout us, you have no building materials to make gyprock and concretewithout us, most of the northern states have no electricity, because we're the largest hydro-electric providers in the world and you're our biggest customer! and guess what, until you guys figure out nuclear fusion, you'll be relying on us for your energy needs for a very long time
oh and we also have some of the largest oil deposits in the world lying in the arctic/oil sands
We're only 30 million people, so we have plenty of resources and jobs to keep us happy with money in our pockets, because plenty of other countries import our goods as well...
so before you go off telling people canada is nothing without the United states, remember that without us, you're an overpopulated, overeating and over-consuming third world country with no resources to support yourselves...
oh yeah, and without us, you don't have any maple syrup to pour onto your pancakes, think about that
brosif
Member
Wow, I was just thinking talking about this the other day.
The system is more about which side wins than what happens. The dual party system was made to help our country, yet our parties have turned into mirror opposites of each other. Therefore we can't get anything done (most of the time). The fact is that most of the Republicans (now, Democrats earlier) will vote against a bill because of their party. It isn't as much about if it's right or wrong, it's all about which side they chose to be on
The system is more about which side wins than what happens. The dual party system was made to help our country, yet our parties have turned into mirror opposites of each other. Therefore we can't get anything done (most of the time). The fact is that most of the Republicans (now, Democrats earlier) will vote against a bill because of their party. It isn't as much about if it's right or wrong, it's all about which side they chose to be on
Yo Canknuckle head did ya pull those facts out of your Canadian ass?
without us you'd be mexicos hat
EH?
and the french if it wasn't for the blood of americans on the beaches of Normandy those pansy ass surrender monkeys would be sprechin se duectch
Socialism? Facism this lame fuckin thread needs some LKJ
without us you'd be mexicos hat
EH?
and the french if it wasn't for the blood of americans on the beaches of Normandy those pansy ass surrender monkeys would be sprechin se duectch
Socialism? Facism this lame fuckin thread needs some LKJ
Mr.Huck
Active member
Not so much Party Lines as values. The Dems have core values; the GOP has core values. When Dems or Republicans try to bullshit their way into office by lying about their core values, it screws up the whole system. Occasional someone proposes legislation that is too far left or too far right. Usually, elected officials get the hint from their bosses (that is the people who elected their sorry asses), and they don't vote for things that are unpopular. That is how it is supposed to work. That didn't happen here. There is a conviction among liberals that the majority of people who live in the U.S. are drooling idiots and don't know what's good for them. They consider us to be like little kids in need of constant supervision. Even is we say we don't want something, they will make us swallow it, because they "know what's best for us". This is the primary reason that the health care bill will continue to be a divisive issue. The people who are in favor of it are convinced that they are right. The people opposed to it are equally convinced they are right, and they are the majority.
There are good and bad things about both parties and their core values. You need both for everything to work right. We now have purple trash cans for recycling in our neighborhood. That's a good thing. Liberal thought made this possible by increasing environmental awareness and conservative thought also made it happen by figuring out how to make it profitable.
There are good and bad things about both parties and their core values. You need both for everything to work right. We now have purple trash cans for recycling in our neighborhood. That's a good thing. Liberal thought made this possible by increasing environmental awareness and conservative thought also made it happen by figuring out how to make it profitable.
Without us buying your resources, I'd love to see how your economy would fair.
And for everything Canada gives to the US, we give just as much back, perhaps not in raw goods such as lumber, steel, hydro electric power, but in ecnomic means, entertainment, etc.
The relationship between the US and Canada is very important, much more so than of US/Mexico, where all we get is illegals and shitty Tecate.
And for everything Canada gives to the US, we give just as much back, perhaps not in raw goods such as lumber, steel, hydro electric power, but in ecnomic means, entertainment, etc.
The relationship between the US and Canada is very important, much more so than of US/Mexico, where all we get is illegals and shitty Tecate.
God this thread makes me realize how naive and idealistic Candadians are.
First off, historians have agreed that a country or civilization has begun a decline when their citizens are more concerned with being taken care of by a government rather than relying on their own self determination/reliance.
America was built up (well until the New DeaL) on people fending for and taking care of themselves. Did German immigrants who came to move westward as part of Manifest destiny look to the Federal Govt for a subsidized plow, or oxen or cattle? No, they made sacrifices and risked their entire livliehoods on the uncertain notion of starting over and making a new life for themselves.
Fast forward to today where our country has been inundated with lazy, derelict, and entitled immigrants or 1st generation Americans living in some urban shithole, demanding that the tax payer pay for their own poor collective health choice. I would say that part of healthcare reform is the product of a liberalized immigration system that needs incredibly strict controls and a sense of American entitlement and disconnect with hard work and sacrifice.
With that said, Health care should be reformed in America, because the current system made getting proper medical coverage way too expensive. The thing is, it can be tackled without a coersive and sinister government program intended to basically pave the way for a broad, European-esque single payer system down the road.
What I would like to see (i'm a republican, this is my plan), is
1. Total Tort Reform- Which would make it harder for doctors to get sued for bullshit reasons. A Major reason healthcare costs have escalated so dramatically over the past 30 years has been America's love affair with litigation and the increased size of the Ambulance chaser industry. If you make it harder to sue doctors, making it unnecessary for them to buy elaborate malpractice insurance plans, medical costs will drop drastically across the board.
2. Drop insurance companies from barring people with certain pre existing conditions from getting plans( Glad this was passed, insurance companies should be morally obligated to provide coverage to anyone with the means to subsidize their own healthcare)
3. Create a system of free clinics desgined to promote preventive care and "wellness" by taxing medicinal marijuana- This would be ultimately up for the states to decide, but if every state in the US legalized medicinal marijuana and levied a 10 percent tax on everything related to that industry, there would be more than enough money to provide the poor with access to free preventative healthcare.
All this can be done without increasing the size our our National debt, government, or coercive powers of the government.
First off, historians have agreed that a country or civilization has begun a decline when their citizens are more concerned with being taken care of by a government rather than relying on their own self determination/reliance.
America was built up (well until the New DeaL) on people fending for and taking care of themselves. Did German immigrants who came to move westward as part of Manifest destiny look to the Federal Govt for a subsidized plow, or oxen or cattle? No, they made sacrifices and risked their entire livliehoods on the uncertain notion of starting over and making a new life for themselves.
Fast forward to today where our country has been inundated with lazy, derelict, and entitled immigrants or 1st generation Americans living in some urban shithole, demanding that the tax payer pay for their own poor collective health choice. I would say that part of healthcare reform is the product of a liberalized immigration system that needs incredibly strict controls and a sense of American entitlement and disconnect with hard work and sacrifice.
With that said, Health care should be reformed in America, because the current system made getting proper medical coverage way too expensive. The thing is, it can be tackled without a coersive and sinister government program intended to basically pave the way for a broad, European-esque single payer system down the road.
What I would like to see (i'm a republican, this is my plan), is
1. Total Tort Reform- Which would make it harder for doctors to get sued for bullshit reasons. A Major reason healthcare costs have escalated so dramatically over the past 30 years has been America's love affair with litigation and the increased size of the Ambulance chaser industry. If you make it harder to sue doctors, making it unnecessary for them to buy elaborate malpractice insurance plans, medical costs will drop drastically across the board.
2. Drop insurance companies from barring people with certain pre existing conditions from getting plans( Glad this was passed, insurance companies should be morally obligated to provide coverage to anyone with the means to subsidize their own healthcare)
3. Create a system of free clinics desgined to promote preventive care and "wellness" by taxing medicinal marijuana- This would be ultimately up for the states to decide, but if every state in the US legalized medicinal marijuana and levied a 10 percent tax on everything related to that industry, there would be more than enough money to provide the poor with access to free preventative healthcare.
All this can be done without increasing the size our our National debt, government, or coercive powers of the government.
Steezy_me123
Member
long story short, as a canadian i can tell you you'll have to wait about 25 % longer, you'll get the same care, and you won't pay a dime more the joe shmoe, it's an awesome system. no denial, no bullshit, it works like a dream, it's saved my life a time of two.