The sound of drums from the Kettle Moraine.
Love the (sic).I remain anon because I don't want to be called an elitist.
@anon: don't you mean an amoral atheist baby-killing intellectual elitist?
Exactly. How long until they change it do you think? They changed "Perspective" to "Prospective" pretty quickly once someone pointed it out.
LOL. Reminds me of Radio Moscow and Radio Havana during the Cold War. They had choice epithets like "Imperialist running dogs", "Puppets of the bourgeois", "Lapdogs of the ruling class", "Yankee warmongers". And the words could be interchanged to form new ones!But I digress....
You say this:"More profit for the corporations. More good news for Americans for Prosperity and Common Sense (sic) Citizens of Washington County"How does passing on the additional cost of something translate into "more" profit for the company? If the corporation is passing on only the increased incremental cost (either via employe cost share or to their customers - not like public sector where they merely add it to the tax bill), there will be zero impact on profitablity. Doesn't the University of WI have any competent business professors on staff? I think one of the comments from the linked article puts it in perspective: "Take your same graph, and plot what the employer is PAYING for the insurance. Not just what the employee is paying.You'll find the employer is shouldering 50-75% of the cost increases of insurance. In 2002 for my business the cost of insurance was $3275 single $9852 family per year. Currently the cost is $6480 single and $18512 family. Your chart shows fairly accurately that the cost to the employee (employee share) has risen by about 50% in those 8 years. It likely has, because most employees pay a set portion of the total cost. But you fail to appreciate the cost to Employer has risen by 100% in that same period. The Employer in many cases is shouldering a bigger burden. It's not surprising in many marginal businesses, small business, restaurants and small shops, the owners cannot afford to pay the $1000-$2000 annual increases in cost per employee"So, exactly how is this "good news" for Americans for Prosperity, et al? Is there any correlation?
Perspective was changed to Prospective only in the text. The actual page is still http://www.cscwc.com/Perspective%20Members.htmI love reading the minutes, and hope to god that the secretary has no contact with young children or those learning English for the first time.
Oh, because it puts more money in the pockets of the corporations who's interests their political positions support. Want to argue about business? Let's start with your assumptions: do you believe the free market will salvage the health care system? If so, why do you believe there are now, or ever have been, free markets?
Prof - I remain un-anon because I enjoy the debate and I'm proud of what I believe. Now those last few comments are Intellectually Elitist. You are really getting the hang of this - as thought it might be contagious, kind of like herpes (so I've heard).Do you sometimes write a note and sign it Anon so it seems like more than the 3-4 of us are on this Blog ?? Just wondering - not a bad idea.
Wow Kraig, thanks for the lively debate you like so much. Making some strange comparison between the "last few" comments and herpes and insinuating that Mark posts on his blog anonymously instead of answering Mark's lively debate-starting questions and jumping headfirst into a fun debate.Awesome!
Post a Comment