PDA

View Full Version : Unions Excluded



M&K's Retrievers
01-15-2010, 11:11 AM
According to Fox News this morning, Obama has agreed to exclude the union Cadalic plans for taxation under the proposed new health plan. Wonder who will have to take up the slack? These crooks are frigging unbelieveable.

david gibson
01-15-2010, 11:36 AM
According to Fox News this morning, Obama has agreed to exclude the union Cadalic plans for taxation under the proposed new health plan. Wonder who will have to take up the slack? These crooks are frigging unbelieveable.


i heard that and at first couldn't believe it. not that they would do it, but because after all the scrutiny and criticism this plan is getting with all the favors - Nobama is still stupid enough to grant more special favors to his cronies???

what a total fraud.

YardleyLabs
01-15-2010, 11:53 AM
According to The Washington Post:

"The deal cut Thursday would raise the value of policies subject to the tax to $24,000 for families and $8,900 for individuals. Plans with significant numbers of women or older workers would receive an additional break, as would workers in high-cost states and high-risk professions. Dental and vision plans would be exempt starting in 2015. And workers with collective-bargaining agreements and government employers would be exempt until 2018, giving labor leaders time to negotiate new contracts."

There will be a lot of deals made before anything passes. Fewer would be needed if a bill only required a simple majority. Unfortunately, super majorities are more expensive. Maybe the Republicans would be willing to agree to allow a simple up or down vote by withdrawing promises of a filibuster. Wasn't that the Republican cry for the six years it had 50 or more votes (never 60) under the prior administration?:rolleyes:

WaterDogRem
01-15-2010, 12:27 PM
There will be a lot of deals made before anything passes. Fewer would be needed if a bill only required a simple majority. Unfortunately, super majorities are more expensive. Maybe the Republicans would be willing to agree to allow a simple up or down vote by withdrawing promises of a filibuster. Wasn't that the Republican cry for the six years it had 50 or more votes (never 60) under the prior administration?:rolleyes:


Jeff,
Are you suggesting that the Repubs should go against the Majority of the Public (who want healthcare reform, just not this bill) like the Dems are, so we can save tax spending on Dem's self-interests bribes?

aandw
01-15-2010, 01:52 PM
"There will be a lot of deals made before anything passes. Fewer would be needed if a bill only required a simple majority. Unfortunately, super majorities are more expensive. Maybe the Republicans would be willing to agree to allow a simple up or down vote by withdrawing promises of a filibuster. Wasn't that the Republican cry for the six years it had 50 or more votes (never 60) under the prior administration?"

i agree that the repubs should allow the vote. i don't like the filibuster, people voted last election and i think they should get their chance at what they voted for. if you don't like it you vote them out next time.