100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
Previous
| Topic: Most in US want public health option | |
|---|---|
|
|
|
If a business incurs higher operating costs...where do they make up for the losses?? By charging more to the customers, right??
Do you think businesses won't raise prices anyway? Seems to me they always find some reason, and if they don't, it's for competitive reasons. At least now, if they do, it will be for a good reason. This guy says the government health care plan will actually make insurance cheaper for small businesses. Except for those who don't offer any at all to their employees. To quote him, "What about employers that don't provide insurance but will be required to? Some of the plans are proposing to exempt companies with less than 25 people from this rule. So what if you're employing more than 25 human beings and you're not offering these people any insurance? Check your calendar, dude—we're not in Victorian England. Maybe you should. And if that means forking out $750 per person to do this, then boo hoo." |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
If a business incurs higher operating costs...where do they make up for the losses?? By charging more to the customers, right?? Do you think businesses won't raise prices anyway? Seems to me they always find some reason, and if they don't, it's for competitive reasons. At least now, if they do, it will be for a good reason. This guy says the government health care plan will actually make insurance cheaper for small businesses. Except for those who don't offer any at all to their employees. To quote him, "What about employers that don't provide insurance but will be required to? Some of the plans are proposing to exempt companies with less than 25 people from this rule. So what if you're employing more than 25 human beings and you're not offering these people any insurance? Check your calendar, dude—we're not in Victorian England. Maybe you should. And if that means forking out $750 per person to do this, then boo hoo." Right. They can pay for health care, which come out to anywhere between 5 and 10 thousand dollars a year per employee....OR they can pay 700 bucks per employee for not offering coverage. Which do you think businesses are going to do? The government " plan " give no incentive at all for providing coverage. They'll penalize the business for not doing it, but won't give them a break on their taxes for offering. Therefore, insurance companies will have fewer and fewer customers. That will drive them out of business, and the government will control all. But hey, that's the whole idea. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
National Federation of Independent Businesss: says
"Senate Health Care Bill Is “A Disaster” for Small Businesses" Been a powerful lobbyist organization in Washington since 1940 to promote small businesses.... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I know for fact that certain states allow small businesses who make less than $250,000 a year to report their earnings on an Individual income tax return. A few states. Obama has promised a tax break to to small businesses, but those who report as an individual will not receive this. What they need to do is quit reporting as individuals and pay their taxes as small businesses. Of course, what they won't admit is this puts their business in a different tax group. Where they should be and quits making the loop-hole in the tax reporting unattractive and lucrative. I was just reading this the other day. U might want to do better reading: A federal employer identification number (EIN), also sometimes referred to as a tax identification number, is a nine-digit code that businesses use to identify themselves for tax reporting, banking, and other purposes. Sole proprietorships without employees are allowed to use the owner's Social Security number for tax reporting purposes. But any company that has employees other than the owner—in addition to all partnerships, limited liability companies, and corporations—must instead apply for and use an EIN. The EIN is specific to a certain business, like a Social Security number is specific to a certain person. Therefore, if an individual or group owns more than one business, a separate EIN is required for each one. Only small businhesses w/out employees can do this. That's too easy to get around. Haven't you ever heard of a 1099? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
crickstergo
on
Sun 12/06/09 08:08 PM
|
|
The majority of small businesss have employees...that's not a representative # when referring to generalities about small businesses. Your post indicated that a overly high number of small businesses were reporting as individuals and that is not the case.
The purpose of the so called loophole u refer to is to facilitate an individual to take the initiative to go into business for him/her self. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The majority of small businesss have employees...that's not a representative # when referring to generalities about small businesses. Your post indicated that a overly high number of small businesses were reporting as individuals and that is not the case. The purpose of the so called loophole u refer to is to facilitate an individual to take the initiative to go into business for him/her self. I think the # is 85%. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Close... yes, I'm on a student loan program but not in the traditional sense - I have paid cash for every dime of my schooling up to this point because my parents made too much and I still had to claim their income even if I wasn't living with them. The federal gov is having issues with getting IT people that can attain a security clearance. Thus, they pay for school and give a small stipend and living expense check in exchange for a few years service with the government - kind of works like the GI bill. Either way, it does not kick in for another month or so. however, I have zero income right now and am living off of my savings (there's a thought)... christmas shopping and all. I'm still waiting for my unemployment to kick in (because as much as I hate the program, I've paid in for 8 years so i'm not missing the opportunity to get some of that back) so I'll get something for an income. As for my health insurance, if my employer ever offered it, I bought it. If they didn't, I used COBRA or found some provider to give me a higher deductible plan that at least covered emergency care. Even if that meant skipping a few concerts when I was younger or not eating out (or as in the case a few years ago, eating well) I still paid for it. $*it happens and I realize that. I'm still waiting for my COBRA paperwork and when it comes, I'll adjust my budget to allow for that too. I've used it before in that timeframe where I'm not eligible for my new benefits and I'll use it now as long as I can until I finish this next degree. Unless I can find a "major issue" only policy on the cheap. However, I do not see how my position alters anything in the grand scheme of things other than my personal opinion. Even if I had some major life illness, my opinion would not change on the public option or in government regulating healthcare in many of the ways they are discussing. I believe reform needs to happen to stop all the double-billing and procedural issues as well as start with tort reform, but i cannot support a plan that will ultimately lay the groundwork for a single-payer medical plan. It is against every single economic ideal I have. The trouble is, I don't think ANY reform is going to happen as long as people keep trumpeting the canard that Reform= Government Takeover. And that's the assumption that's almost invariably made by the people who believe the shills for the industry who keep turning up the volume on the propaganda. I don't know if you priced insurance lately, COBRA or otherwise, but you may be astounded to see premiums quoted for as much $800 - $1000 per month for an affordable deductible. And if you have a pre-existing condition, you'll probably find them ruinous or have so many exclusions as to make the policy virtually worthless. It wasn't like this back in the 80's. From my own experience, the really bad runup in prices for care and coverage started around 2000. I'd bet that if the government hadn't intervened and forced group plans to amend some of their practices, almost NOBODY would be able afford insurance. Just wondering, if you have so little faith in the government generally, why work for it? That seems like a contradiction to me. -Kerry O. Two reasons (and neither contradict my beliefs). 1. It is a means to an end. the market for guys like me is small and therefore, things need to be done to get those kind of people into the position. This is completely a free market action. I'm not taking anything for free, I'm essentially receiving training for my career before it starts. Getting free schooling at Cal State and a stipend is pretty nice and allows me to concentrate on studies and not work at the same time. 2. To me, the federal government has but a few purposes that states and communities cannot, one of which is national defense and that is where I'll be working, likely NSA or a similar organization doing data security. I agree that the fear-mongering needs to stop. It may seem like I'm far to the right with the loonies right now, but that is simply because the plan to me is far to the left. If the plan was about tort reform and removing competition restrictions, I'd be so for it your head would spin. The government does not "compete," the government regulates. Being in the market will allow them to be a price ceiling because they never have to be in the black. I realize that many do not think baby steps will work, but groundwork needs to be laid before you can build a building. I have to be methodical in my decisions, I feel the government should too. Wow so now we are getting to the bottom of this. I had no idea you wanted to work for the government Andrew and I am sure your arguments here will help get you security clearance.  When you do get your unemployment please thank a democrat for medling in the free market to ensure people do not starve when they lose a job through no reasone of there own. Just and FYI unemployment insurance premiums are paid by your employer not by you. I don't like unemployment and I still don't. If you don't think that you are paying for unemployment, you're fooling yourself. We all pay it through higher prices everywhere we shop. and fyi, my arguments here will have nothing to do with my security clearance. i'm not trying to overthrow anyone (far from it), I'm simply trying to make it more efficient and fair. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know.
I have yet to hear anyone is Wash say this plan is perfect. In fact they say it is only a starting place. The Republicans aren't interested in you, me, or small businesses. They just want to stop it. They are only interested in the Insurance lobbyist money. They are anti-American. I presented an opinion from a small business perspective. An opinion based upon the businessweek.com web site. If you want to dismiss them as biased and knowledgeable the it seems to me that you will argue with a stop sign. I ain't in to that myself. Why not go argue with the author; Gene Marks, CPA, is the owner of the Marks Group, which sells customer relationship, service, and financial management tools to small and midsize businesses. Marks is the author of four best-selling small business books and writes the popular "Penny Pincher's Almanac" syndicated column. He frequently speaks to business groups on penny-pinching topics. More penny-pinching advice from Marks can be found at www.quickerbetterwiser.com. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Maybe you think you know better than Mark.
Maybe you do. All I'm saying is go tell him he's full of Chit. Not me. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The majority of small businesss have employees...that's not a representative # when referring to generalities about small businesses. Your post indicated that a overly high number of small businesses were reporting as individuals and that is not the case. The purpose of the so called loophole u refer to is to facilitate an individual to take the initiative to go into business for him/her self. I think the # is 85%. In that 85% calcualation, small busineses that may have hundreds of employees are only counted as 1. But those are the ones that will bring jobs back. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Maybe you think you know better than Mark. Maybe you do. All I'm saying is go tell him he's full of Chit. Not me. And like I said, He's a Conservative! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The majority of small businesss have employees...that's not a representative # when referring to generalities about small businesses. Your post indicated that a overly high number of small businesses were reporting as individuals and that is not the case. The purpose of the so called loophole u refer to is to facilitate an individual to take the initiative to go into business for him/her self. I think the # is 85%. In that 85% calcualation, small busineses that may have hundreds of employees are only counted as 1. But those are the ones that will bring jobs back. A Small business with hundreds of employees? Really now! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
JustAGuy2112
on
Sun 12/06/09 08:46 PM
|
|
The majority of small businesss have employees...that's not a representative # when referring to generalities about small businesses. Your post indicated that a overly high number of small businesses were reporting as individuals and that is not the case. The purpose of the so called loophole u refer to is to facilitate an individual to take the initiative to go into business for him/her self. I think the # is 85%. In that 85% calcualation, small busineses that may have hundreds of employees are only counted as 1. But those are the ones that will bring jobs back. A Small business with hundreds of employees? Really now! LOL. Yeah....I always thought small businesses employed 25 or less....lmao By his account...the company I work for , which is a multi million dollar company that employs several hundred people would be a " small business ". |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
A small business may be defined as a business with a small number of employees. The legal definition of "small" may vary by state or industry but is generally under 100 employees. These businesses are normally privately owned corporations, partnerships, or sole proprietorships.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Fanta46
on
Sun 12/06/09 08:51 PM
|
|
The smallest businesses, often located in private homes, are called home-based businesses or microenterprises, or SoHos (Small Office/Home Office). The term "mom and pop business" is a common expression for a single-family operated business without any hired labor, e.g., "mom and pop store." |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
There are over 100,000 small busineses that employ between 100 and 499 employees in the US.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
AndrewAV
on
Sun 12/06/09 08:55 PM
|
|
You know. I have yet to hear anyone is Wash say this plan is perfect. In fact they say it is only a starting place. The Republicans aren't interested in you, me, or small businesses. They just want to stop it. They are only interested in the Insurance lobbyist money. They are anti-American. I presented an opinion from a small business perspective. An opinion based upon the businessweek.com web site. If you want to dismiss them as biased and knowledgeable the it seems to me that you will argue with a stop sign. I ain't in to that myself. Why not go argue with the author; Gene Marks, CPA, is the owner of the Marks Group, which sells customer relationship, service, and financial management tools to small and midsize businesses. Marks is the author of four best-selling small business books and writes the popular "Penny Pincher's Almanac" syndicated column. He frequently speaks to business groups on penny-pinching topics. More penny-pinching advice from Marks can be found at www.quickerbetterwiser.com. I know that nobody is claiming it to be perfect, but it's missing the greatest points that will increast competition and reduce prices: there is no lift on the state-to-state selling (unless i've been misinformed, very possible) and there is no tort reform. Those two alone will lower prices dramatically. The fact they call this a step is what scares me, because all that's left after the government enters the market is total takeover of the system. They are literally doing everything at once and saying it's a step because they know this is their only shot at getting it all in. The midterms are coming up and they know there is no presidential vote on the ballot in order to bring out the minorities and youth like last time. EDIT oh, and the fact they say a lot of the funding will come from savings. SO WHY THE HELL AREN'T WE SAVING NOW! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
http://www.sba.gov/idc/groups/public/documents/sba_homepage/size_standards_methodology.pdf
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Let's pretend a company. A small business we will name company X reports earnings of 300k.
How many employees do you think they would have? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
There are over 100,000 small busineses that employ between 100 and 499 employees in the US. Negative! The numbers I presented are a Fed requirement for reporting as a small business. |
|
|
|
|
