LITEROTICA PODCAST
LIT CAMS (200 Free Tokens)ADULT TOYSVOD MOVIES

*chuckle* Instead of more coverage, you get less. Government in a nutshell...

julybaby04 said:
He may be wrong on the Plan B....but from what I read, it sounds like he does not want to have to include ANY contraception in his company's health plan.

If he has a religious reason to not include contraception, that should be allowed, in my opinion. I know the government will see it differently, but from what I was reading, it sounds like he was looking into a health plan for his employees that won't cover contraception.

....I am still at a loss as to why contraception has become a "right" and religious or moral objections seem to no longer matter.

The more I read, the more I will support the store with my money. I think what the government is doing is WAY overstepping their bounds........ and you wonder why I have no trust in this government!
Click to expand...

Everything he's said is about so-called abortion pills and not birth control in general. To his credit though the exact workings of the Plan B pill are becoming known just recently.

Access to contraception belongs with a woman and her doctor, not a corporation. What you're advocating for is a system where companies or some old man gets to decide what a woman can and cannot put in her body. That's the opposite of freedom.

If the hobby lobby guy wants to be consistent then he shouldn't pay any wages at all. After all, a woman can go buy condoms with her paycheck.
 
"The mandate to offer health insurance doesn't take effect until 2014, but the "measurement period" used by the feds to determine a firm's average number of full-time employees started last month. So the cutbacks and employment dodges are underway. " (WSJ)
Click to expand...

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog..._that_it_is_not_affordable.html#ixzz2LomVr4hi

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB100...8304072420873666.html?mod=WSJ_Opinion_LEADTop

Everybody gets to have TWO jobs in the new economy; one just to pay for mandated affordable health care...
 
What's worse than the 49ers losing the Super****?

A 2011 Hudson Institute study estimates that this insurance mandate will cost the franchise industry $6.4 billion and put 3.2 million jobs "at risk." The insurance mandate is so onerous for small firms that Stephen Caldeira, president of the International Franchise Association, predicts that "Many stores will have to cut worker hours out of necessity. It could be the difference between staying in business or going out of business." The franchise association says the average fast-food restaurant has profits of only about $50,000 to $100,000 and a margin of about 3.5%.

Because other federal employment regulations also kick in when a firm crosses the 50 worker threshold, employers are starting to cap payrolls at 49 full-time workers. These firms have come to be known as "49ers." Businesses that hire young and lower-skilled workers are also starting to put a ceiling on the work week of below 30 hours. These firms are the new "29ers." Part-time workers don't have to be offered insurance under ObamaCare.
Click to expand...

[same source - WSJ]
 
But the damage won't be limited to franchisees or restaurants. A 2012 survey of employers by the Mercer consulting firm found that 67% of retail and wholesale firms that don't offer insurance coverage today "are more inclined to change their workforce strategy so that fewer employees meet that [30 hour a week] threshold." This week Nigel Travis, the CEO of Dunkin' Donuts, asked Congress to change the health law's definition of full-time to 40 hours a week from 30 hours so worker hours won't have to be cut.

The timing of all this couldn't be worse. Involuntary part-time U.S. employment is already near a record high. The latest Department of Labor employment survey counts roughly eight million Americans who want a full-time job but are stuck in a part-time holding pattern. That number is down only 520,000 since January 2010 and it is 309,000 higher than last March. (See the nearby chart.) And now comes ObamaCare to increase the incentive for employers to hire only part-time workers.

Democrats who thought they were doing workers a favor by mandating health coverage can't seem to understand that it doesn't help workers to give them health care if they can't get a full-time job that pays the rest of their bills.
Click to expand...

Of course, the WSJ is a lying right-wing rag just barely this side of the National Enquirer...
 
4est_4est_Gump said:
http://www.americanthinker.com/blog..._that_it_is_not_affordable.html#ixzz2LomVr4hi

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB100...8304072420873666.html?mod=WSJ_Opinion_LEADTop

Everybody gets to have TWO jobs in the new economy; one just to pay for mandated affordable health care...
Click to expand...

The WSJ article says that worker working part time for economic reasons just dropped by a million workers and continues to decline.

http://si.wsj.net/public/resources/images/ED-AQ452_1commi_D_20130220173305.jpg
 
Last edited:
RobDownSouth said:
Consequence-free sex promotes "sluttiness", of course.

Didn't you learn ANYTHING in your abstinence-based sex education class?

:mad:
Click to expand...

LOL. It was a serious question, though. Aside from Catholics, I don't know of any religion that disapproves of birth control, and I've never understood why not wanting to have dozens of children is a "moral" issue. Of course, I have to question the morals of anyone who wants to shove his/her own personal beliefs down the throats of his/her employees. That's more about judgment and a power trip than it is morality.
 
Still not seeing the moral objection. It's no different than ins. covering allergy meds.
 
Never understood why contraception should be covered by insurance at all? There are many things that are paid for out-of-pocket...i.e. cold medicines, tylenol (etc), allergy meds, bandaids, upset stomach meds, even, condoms.

There are other over-the-counter birth control methods for women as well. Those already have to be paid for out-of-pocket.

Seems this may just be more of a topic that brings more media attention that actually makes sense.

I have always paid for mine, out-of-pocket.
 
julybaby04 said:
Never understood why contraception should be covered by insurance at all? There are many things that are paid for out-of-pocket...i.e. cold medicines, tylenol (etc), allergy meds, bandaids, upset stomach meds, even, condoms.

There are other over-the-counter birth control methods for women as well. Those already have to be paid for out-of-pocket.

Seems this may just be more of a topic that brings more media attention that actually makes sense.

I have always paid for mine, out-of-pocket.
Click to expand...


sadly, this is part of the reason insurance became so expensive
 
julybaby04 said:
Never understood why contraception should be covered by insurance at all? There are many things that are paid for out-of-pocket...i.e. cold medicines, tylenol (etc), allergy meds, bandaids, upset stomach meds, even, condoms.

There are other over-the-counter birth control methods for women as well. Those already have to be paid for out-of-pocket.

Seems this may just be more of a topic that brings more media attention that actually makes sense.

I have always paid for mine, out-of-pocket.
Click to expand...

Maybe because it's not just women having sex, but also men? And men's desires and wants and needs often supersede the women's? Especially women getting the technical result of the activity in the end, when men just have to drop and go?

So, it's a matter of responsibility and a health issue.

Why shouldn't it be covered by insurance?
 
when you pay for health insurance, then I will explain it to you

until then, stop demanding others to pay

IrezumiKiss said:
Maybe because it's not just women having sex, but also men? And men's desires and wants and needs often supersede the women's? Especially women getting the technical result of the activity in the end, when men just have to drop and go?

So, it's a matter of responsibility and a health issue.

Why shouldn't it be covered by insurance?
Click to expand...
 
julybaby04 said:
Never understood why contraception should be covered by insurance at all? There are many things that are paid for out-of-pocket...i.e. cold medicines, tylenol (etc), allergy meds, bandaids, upset stomach meds, even, condoms.

There are other over-the-counter birth control methods for women as well. Those already have to be paid for out-of-pocket.

Seems this may just be more of a topic that brings more media attention that actually makes sense.

I have always paid for mine, out-of-pocket.
Click to expand...


Prescription drug coverage covers prescription drugs.
Birth control pills are prescription drugs.


Tylenol is not a prescription drug.
OTC allergy medication is not a prescription drug
Condoms and band-aids aren't even drugs at all.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

M
What Do You Check Before Choosing a Landscape Services?
Replies
1
Views
91
lifeis2short2b
L
JenniZinc
Part 2. How to not get caught going to Happy Ending Massage Parlours (By someone who used to work in one)
Replies
16
Views
5K
eroticspank
E
P
Pro-Trump Nashville Restauranteur Forced to Shutter Kitchens in Fear of ICE Raids
Replies
15
Views
168
YDB95
YDB95
P
Weekly jobless claims surge to 241,000, more than expected, in latest sign of economic trouble
Replies
5
Views
92
Fuzzy1975
F
Alice2015
"Helping Out" (closed)
5 6 7
Replies
153
Views
5K
Alice2015
Alice2015
Back
Top