| Page 1 of 2 | 1 | 2 |
|
|
Dems Sucker Punch Mass Union Members
The Senate health care bill, which Martha Coakley supports, contains a
massive tax on the middle class which will hit union members particularly hard. The tax on so-called "Cadillac" health plans is opposed by organized labor, and could be a big reason why union rank-and-file members in Massachusetts vote for Scott Brown. http://workinprogress.firedoglake.co...-bad-bad-idea/ |
Dems Sucker Punch Mass Union Members
C. Mor Butts wrote:
The Senate health care bill, which Martha Coakley supports, contains a Thanks for noticing, Tom. Now...go back into hibernation. |
Dems Sucker Punch Mass Union Members
On Fri, 15 Jan 2010 08:15:21 -0500, C. Mor Butts
wrote: The Senate health care bill, which Martha Coakley supports, contains a massive tax on the middle class which will hit union members particularly hard. The tax on so-called "Cadillac" health plans is opposed by organized labor, and could be a big reason why union rank-and-file members in Massachusetts vote for Scott Brown. actually it excludes union members. |
Dems Sucker Punch Mass Union Members
C. Mor Butts wrote:
The Senate health care bill, which Martha Coakley supports, contains a massive tax on the middle class which will hit union members particularly hard. The tax on so-called "Cadillac" health plans is opposed by organized labor, and could be a big reason why union rank-and-file members in Massachusetts vote for Scott Brown. http://workinprogress.firedoglake.co...-bad-bad-idea/ It is all get eveninsm Union members are not the only ones with good reasonable health care plans. Premiums are paid for the extent of the coverage. Nobody gets a freebie. It is part of their pay or compensation. So the writers of this legislation want to cut their compensation by making them pay a sin tax because they have good health coverage. How many thousands in a pay cut/ tax will mollify the socialists?? If they can't make their mortgage payments because, of it will that satisfy them? They are not talking about five dollars a week. Their Constituents will get free health care and the ones with fair/good/excellent health care will pay a lot more or they can give up the Insurance and obtain lesser coverage and pay for it and pay a lot more for inferior coverage. Either way people with whatever they deem Cadillac Coverage will suffer. The ultra Rich or whatever they want to target won't be affected, in the least. Many most with formerly good coverage are having it taken away by the ultra Rich of Wall Street. They are gutting their American Employees compensation/health care to fill their Swiss bank accounts. |
Dems Sucker Punch Mass Union Members
bpuharic wrote:
On Fri, 15 Jan 2010 08:15:21 -0500, C. Mor Butts wrote: The Senate health care bill, which Martha Coakley supports, contains a massive tax on the middle class which will hit union members particularly hard. The tax on so-called "Cadillac" health plans is opposed by organized labor, and could be a big reason why union rank-and-file members in Massachusetts vote for Scott Brown. actually it excludes union members. Why are union members excluded until 2017? Any rational reason except politics? |
Dems Sucker Punch Mass Union Members
On Sat, 16 Jan 2010 02:18:04 -0500, D.Duck wrote:
Why are union members excluded until 2017? Any rational reason except politics? The argument goes, unions bargained for improved health care coverage, instead of wage increases. Taxing their coverages would mean they would be paying an overall higher percentage than other working stiffs. Labor contracts generally run 5 years, meaning the present ones will have expired, by 2017. Then there is politics. |
Dems Sucker Punch Mass Union Members
thunder wrote:
On Sat, 16 Jan 2010 02:18:04 -0500, D.Duck wrote: Why are union members excluded until 2017? Any rational reason except politics? The argument goes, unions bargained for improved health care coverage, instead of wage increases. Taxing their coverages would mean they would be paying an overall higher percentage than other working stiffs. Labor contracts generally run 5 years, meaning the present ones will have expired, by 2017. Then there is politics. Correct, Mr. T, and it also depends upon the employment sector. The scenario you describe most closely fits industrial and service sector employees, who indeed gave up significant pay raises in order to get better health care and sometimes pension benefits. In most of the construction unions, the $$$ negotiations are over the hourly rate, which the union members then decide how to divvy up between health care, pension, savings accounts and net paycheck. In the last six or eight years, the hourly rates have been pretty flat, but the amounts coming out of that hourly rate for health care have skyrocketed. |
Dems Sucker Punch Mass Union Members
lil abner wrote:
C. Mor Butts wrote: The Senate health care bill, which Martha Coakley supports, contains a massive tax on the middle class which will hit union members particularly hard. The tax on so-called "Cadillac" health plans is opposed by organized labor, and could be a big reason why union rank-and-file members in Massachusetts vote for Scott Brown. http://workinprogress.firedoglake.co...-bad-bad-idea/ It is all get eveninsm Union members are not the only ones with good reasonable health care plans. Premiums are paid for the extent of the coverage. Nobody gets a freebie. It is part of their pay or compensation. So the writers of this legislation want to cut their compensation by making them pay a sin tax because they have good health coverage. How many thousands in a pay cut/ tax will mollify the socialists?? If they can't make their mortgage payments because, of it will that satisfy them? They are not talking about five dollars a week. Their Constituents will get free health care and the ones with fair/good/excellent health care will pay a lot more or they can give up the Insurance and obtain lesser coverage and pay for it and pay a lot more for inferior coverage. Either way people with whatever they deem Cadillac Coverage will suffer. The ultra Rich or whatever they want to target won't be affected, in the least. Many most with formerly good coverage are having it taken away by the ultra Rich of Wall Street. They are gutting their American Employees compensation/health care to fill their Swiss bank accounts. That is how equality works under socialism. |
Dems Sucker Punch Mass Union Members
D.Duck wrote:
bpuharic wrote: On Fri, 15 Jan 2010 08:15:21 -0500, C. Mor Butts wrote: The Senate health care bill, which Martha Coakley supports, contains a massive tax on the middle class which will hit union members particularly hard. The tax on so-called "Cadillac" health plans is opposed by organized labor, and could be a big reason why union rank-and-file members in Massachusetts vote for Scott Brown. actually it excludes union members. Why are union members excluded until 2017? Any rational reason except politics? YKW doesn't want it going into effect on his watch. Apparently he is thinking on buying reelection. |
Dems Sucker Punch Mass Union Members
HK wrote:
thunder wrote: On Sat, 16 Jan 2010 02:18:04 -0500, D.Duck wrote: Why are union members excluded until 2017? Any rational reason except politics? The argument goes, unions bargained for improved health care coverage, instead of wage increases. Taxing their coverages would mean they would be paying an overall higher percentage than other working stiffs. Labor contracts generally run 5 years, meaning the present ones will have expired, by 2017. Then there is politics. Correct, Mr. T, and it also depends upon the employment sector. The scenario you describe most closely fits industrial and service sector employees, who indeed gave up significant pay raises in order to get better health care and sometimes pension benefits. In most of the construction unions, the $$$ negotiations are over the hourly rate, which the union members then decide how to divvy up between health care, pension, savings accounts and net paycheck. In the last six or eight years, the hourly rates have been pretty flat, but the amounts coming out of that hourly rate for health care have skyrocketed. Po babies. It ain't just the union lackies that have seen their lifestyles erode. |
Dems Sucker Punch Mass Union Members
|
Dems Sucker Punch Mass Union Members
BAR wrote:
I will tell you now that I, as a non-union member, bargain with my employer each year I saw the memo...you're on the lay-off list. Your company is cutting deadwood. |
Dems Sucker Punch Mass Union Members
In article , naled24511
@mypacks.net says... BAR wrote: I will tell you now that I, as a non-union member, bargain with my employer each year I saw the memo...you're on the lay-off list. Your company is cutting deadwood. The severance package is pretty good, I would get about 6 months. I could take a few months off then go find another job. My skills are in demand. |
Dems Sucker Punch Mass Union Members
|
Dems Sucker Punch Mass Union Members
|
Dems Sucker Punch Mass Union Members
I am Tosk wrote:
In article , says... On Sat, 16 Jan 2010 02:18:04 -0500, D.Duck wrote: Why are union members excluded until 2017? Any rational reason except politics? The argument goes, unions bargained for improved health care coverage, instead of wage increases. Taxing their coverages would mean they would be paying an overall higher percentage than other working stiffs. Labor contracts generally run 5 years, meaning the present ones will have expired, by 2017. Then there is politics. What a bunch of crap... It's all revenge style politics. Remember, if you give the Unions a break, the rest of us will pay more... This from an unemployable mook who hasn't had a real job in decades? |
Dems Sucker Punch Mass Union Members
BAR wrote:
In article , naled24511 @mypacks.net says... BAR wrote: I will tell you now that I, as a non-union member, bargain with my employer each year I saw the memo...you're on the lay-off list. Your company is cutting deadwood. The severance package is pretty good, I would get about 6 months. I could take a few months off then go find another job. My skills are in demand. You had a lousy negotiator. |
Dems Sucker Punch Mass Union Members
In article , naled24511
@mypacks.net says... BAR wrote: In article , naled24511 @mypacks.net says... BAR wrote: I will tell you now that I, as a non-union member, bargain with my employer each year I saw the memo...you're on the lay-off list. Your company is cutting deadwood. The severance package is pretty good, I would get about 6 months. I could take a few months off then go find another job. My skills are in demand. You had a lousy negotiator. Children need protection, men don't. |
Dems Sucker Punch Mass Union Members
On Sat, 16 Jan 2010 10:57:55 -0500, H :) K wrote:
BAR wrote: I will tell you now that I, as a non-union member, bargain with my employer each year I saw the memo...you're on the lay-off list. Your company is cutting deadwood. His space is dedicated to a new floor lamp. Production is expected to increase at a steady rate from now on. |
Dems Sucker Punch Mass Union Members
On Sat, 16 Jan 2010 11:13:09 -0500, BAR wrote:
In article , naled24511 @mypacks.net says... BAR wrote: I will tell you now that I, as a non-union member, bargain with my employer each year I saw the memo...you're on the lay-off list. Your company is cutting deadwood. The severance package is pretty good, I would get about 6 months in jail. I could take a few months off then go find another guy to love me. My skills are in demand as a tooth picker. Glad I cleared that up. |
Dems Sucker Punch Mass Union Members
BAR wrote:
On Sat, 16 Jan 2010 11:13:09 -0500, BAR wrote: In article , naled24511 @mypacks.net says... BAR wrote: I will tell you now that I, as a non-union member, bargain with my employer each year I saw the memo...you're on the lay-off list. Your company is cutting deadwood. The severance package is pretty good, I would get about 6 months in jail. I could take a few months off then go find another guy to love me. My skills are in demand as a tooth picker. Glad I cleared that up. Well, you could always wash the balls down at that marine golf course... Of course, you'd be displacing herring. |
Dems Sucker Punch Mass Union Members
In article , naled24511
@mypacks.net says... BAR wrote: On Sat, 16 Jan 2010 11:13:09 -0500, BAR wrote: In article , naled24511 @mypacks.net says... BAR wrote: I will tell you now that I, as a non-union member, bargain with my employer each year I saw the memo...you're on the lay-off list. Your company is cutting deadwood. The severance package is pretty good, I would get about 6 months in jail. I could take a few months off then go find another guy to love me. My skills are in demand as a tooth picker. Glad I cleared that up. Well, you could always wash the balls down at that marine golf course... Of course, you'd be displacing herring. Herring can take care of the Army golf course. |
Dems Sucker Punch Mass Union Members
On 1/16/2010 12:31 PM, I am Tosk wrote:
In om, says... In inet, says... On Sat, 16 Jan 2010 02:18:04 -0500, D.Duck wrote: Why are union members excluded until 2017? Any rational reason except politics? The argument goes, unions bargained for improved health care coverage, instead of wage increases. Taxing their coverages would mean they would be paying an overall higher percentage than other working stiffs. Labor contracts generally run 5 years, meaning the present ones will have expired, by 2017. Then there is politics. The unions bargained with their employers for wages and benefits not with the government. Taxes are about a shared burden. Now you are trying to tell me that union members should be excluded from paying their fair share of the tax burden because they negotiated their wages and benefits with their employers. I will tell you now that I, as a non-union member, bargain with my employer each year for wages and benefits, shouldn't I be granted the same exemption the unions are being granted? Did your company support Obama with millions in campaign time and money?? I, flajim, am in charge of that. |
Dems Sucker Punch Mass Union Members
In article ,
says... In article , says... In article , says... On Sat, 16 Jan 2010 02:18:04 -0500, D.Duck wrote: Why are union members excluded until 2017? Any rational reason except politics? The argument goes, unions bargained for improved health care coverage, instead of wage increases. Taxing their coverages would mean they would be paying an overall higher percentage than other working stiffs. Labor contracts generally run 5 years, meaning the present ones will have expired, by 2017. Then there is politics. The unions bargained with their employers for wages and benefits not with the government. Taxes are about a shared burden. Now you are trying to tell me that union members should be excluded from paying their fair share of the tax burden because they negotiated their wages and benefits with their employers. I will tell you now that I, as a non-union member, bargain with my employer each year for wages and benefits, shouldn't I be granted the same exemption the unions are being granted? Did your company support Obama with millions in campaign time and money?? No. But we do let the government buy our products. |
Dems Sucker Punch Mass Union Members
On Sat, 16 Jan 2010 12:30:17 -0500, BAR wrote:
In article , naled24511 says... BAR wrote: On Sat, 16 Jan 2010 11:13:09 -0500, BAR wrote: In article , naled24511 @mypacks.net says... BAR wrote: I will tell you now that I, as a non-union member, bargain with my employer each year I saw the memo...you're on the lay-off list. Your company is cutting deadwood. The severance package is pretty good, I would get about 6 months in jail. I could take a few months off then go find another guy to love me. My skills are in demand as a tooth picker. Glad I cleared that up. Well, you could always wash the balls down at that marine golf course... Of course, you'd be displacing herring. Herring can take care of the Army golf course. I like the Medal of Honor course better than the local Army course. The Ft Belvoir course is too damn hard to walk. -- John H |
Dems Sucker Punch Mass Union Members
|
Dems Sucker Punch Mass Union Members
On Sat, 16 Jan 2010 13:42:51 -0500, BAR wrote:
In article , says... On Sat, 16 Jan 2010 12:30:17 -0500, BAR wrote: In article , naled24511 says... BAR wrote: On Sat, 16 Jan 2010 11:13:09 -0500, BAR wrote: In article , naled24511 @mypacks.net says... BAR wrote: I will tell you now that I, as a non-union member, bargain with my employer each year I saw the memo...you're on the lay-off list. Your company is cutting deadwood. The severance package is pretty good, I would get about 6 months in jail. I could take a few months off then go find another guy to love me. My skills are in demand as a tooth picker. Glad I cleared that up. Well, you could always wash the balls down at that marine golf course... Of course, you'd be displacing herring. Herring can take care of the Army golf course. I like the Medal of Honor course better than the local Army course. The Ft Belvoir course is too damn hard to walk. I need to do a better job of taking my vacation, personal and floating holidays this year. If possible I would like another crack at the MOH course, in warmer weather. Any time you can get a day, with a few day's notice. -- John H |
Dems Sucker Punch Mass Union Members
On Sat, 16 Jan 2010 13:42:51 -0500, BAR wrote:
In article , says... On Sat, 16 Jan 2010 12:30:17 -0500, BAR wrote: In article , naled24511 says... BAR wrote: On Sat, 16 Jan 2010 11:13:09 -0500, BAR wrote: In article , naled24511 @mypacks.net says... BAR wrote: I will tell you now that I, as a non-union member, bargain with my employer each year I saw the memo...you're on the lay-off list. Your company is cutting deadwood. The severance package is pretty good, I would get about 6 months in jail. I could take a few months off then go find another guy to love me. My skills are in demand as a tooth picker. Glad I cleared that up. Well, you could always wash the balls down at that marine golf course... Of course, you'd be displacing herring. Herring can take care of the Army golf course. I like the Medal of Honor course better than the local Army course. The Ft Belvoir course is too damn hard to walk. I need to do a better job of taking my vacation, personal and floating holidays this year. If possible I would like another crack at the MOH course, in warmer weather. And, playing in the 40's, as long as you're walking, is very comfortable, unless the wind is bad. -- John H |
Dems Sucker Punch Mass Union Members
On Sat, 16 Jan 2010 02:18:04 -0500, "D.Duck" wrote:
bpuharic wrote: On Fri, 15 Jan 2010 08:15:21 -0500, C. Mor Butts wrote: The Senate health care bill, which Martha Coakley supports, contains a massive tax on the middle class which will hit union members particularly hard. The tax on so-called "Cadillac" health plans is opposed by organized labor, and could be a big reason why union rank-and-file members in Massachusetts vote for Scott Brown. actually it excludes union members. Why are union members excluded until 2017? Any rational reason except politics? of course, there are no uniion members in the US so the question is irrelevant |
Dems Sucker Punch Mass Union Members
bpuharic wrote:
On Sat, 16 Jan 2010 02:18:04 -0500, "D.Duck" wrote: bpuharic wrote: On Fri, 15 Jan 2010 08:15:21 -0500, C. Mor Butts wrote: The Senate health care bill, which Martha Coakley supports, contains a massive tax on the middle class which will hit union members particularly hard. The tax on so-called "Cadillac" health plans is opposed by organized labor, and could be a big reason why union rank-and-file members in Massachusetts vote for Scott Brown. actually it excludes union members. Why are union members excluded until 2017? Any rational reason except politics? of course, there are no uniion members in the US so the question is irrelevant Maybe no "uniion" members. What about "union" members? |
Dems Sucker Punch Mass Union Members
On Sat, 16 Jan 2010 21:08:44 -0500, "D.Duck" wrote:
bpuharic wrote: On Sat, 16 Jan 2010 02:18:04 -0500, "D.Duck" wrote: bpuharic wrote: On Fri, 15 Jan 2010 08:15:21 -0500, C. Mor Butts wrote: The Senate health care bill, which Martha Coakley supports, contains a massive tax on the middle class which will hit union members particularly hard. The tax on so-called "Cadillac" health plans is opposed by organized labor, and could be a big reason why union rank-and-file members in Massachusetts vote for Scott Brown. actually it excludes union members. Why are union members excluded until 2017? Any rational reason except politics? of course, there are no uniion members in the US so the question is irrelevant Maybe no "uniion" members. What about "union" members those tooo |
Dems Sucker Punch Mass Union Members
bpuharic wrote:
On Sat, 16 Jan 2010 21:08:44 -0500, "D.Duck" wrote: bpuharic wrote: On Sat, 16 Jan 2010 02:18:04 -0500, "D.Duck" wrote: bpuharic wrote: On Fri, 15 Jan 2010 08:15:21 -0500, C. Mor Butts wrote: The Senate health care bill, which Martha Coakley supports, contains a massive tax on the middle class which will hit union members particularly hard. The tax on so-called "Cadillac" health plans is opposed by organized labor, and could be a big reason why union rank-and-file members in Massachusetts vote for Scott Brown. actually it excludes union members. Why are union members excluded until 2017? Any rational reason except politics? of course, there are no uniion members in the US so the question is irrelevant Maybe no "uniion" members. What about "union" members those tooo The meaning of your answer escapes me. |
Dems Sucker Punch Mass Union Members
D.Duck wrote:
bpuharic wrote: On Sat, 16 Jan 2010 21:08:44 -0500, "D.Duck" wrote: bpuharic wrote: On Sat, 16 Jan 2010 02:18:04 -0500, "D.Duck" wrote: bpuharic wrote: On Fri, 15 Jan 2010 08:15:21 -0500, C. Mor Butts wrote: The Senate health care bill, which Martha Coakley supports, contains a massive tax on the middle class which will hit union members particularly hard. The tax on so-called "Cadillac" health plans is opposed by organized labor, and could be a big reason why union rank-and-file members in Massachusetts vote for Scott Brown. actually it excludes union members. Why are union members excluded until 2017? Any rational reason except politics? of course, there are no uniion members in the US so the question is irrelevant Maybe no "uniion" members. What about "union" members those tooo The meaning of your answer escapes me. Yet another contribution from Duck that is totally devoid of content, other than the snipe. |
Dems Sucker Punch Mass Union Members
On Sun, 17 Jan 2010 07:46:42 -0500, "D.Duck" wrote:
bpuharic wrote: On Sat, 16 Jan 2010 21:08:44 -0500, "D.Duck" wrote: bpuharic wrote: On Sat, 16 Jan 2010 02:18:04 -0500, "D.Duck" wrote: bpuharic wrote: On Fri, 15 Jan 2010 08:15:21 -0500, C. Mor Butts wrote: The Senate health care bill, which Martha Coakley supports, contains a massive tax on the middle class which will hit union members particularly hard. The tax on so-called "Cadillac" health plans is opposed by organized labor, and could be a big reason why union rank-and-file members in Massachusetts vote for Scott Brown. actually it excludes union members. Why are union members excluded until 2017? Any rational reason except politics? of course, there are no uniion members in the US so the question is irrelevant Maybe no "uniion" members. What about "union" members those tooo The meaning of your answer escapes me. a spelling joke. see the 3 o's in 'tooo'? |
Dems Sucker Punch Mass Union Members
bpuharic wrote:
On Sun, 17 Jan 2010 07:46:42 -0500, "D.Duck" wrote: bpuharic wrote: On Sat, 16 Jan 2010 21:08:44 -0500, "D.Duck" wrote: bpuharic wrote: On Sat, 16 Jan 2010 02:18:04 -0500, "D.Duck" wrote: bpuharic wrote: On Fri, 15 Jan 2010 08:15:21 -0500, C. Mor Butts wrote: The Senate health care bill, which Martha Coakley supports, contains a massive tax on the middle class which will hit union members particularly hard. The tax on so-called "Cadillac" health plans is opposed by organized labor, and could be a big reason why union rank-and-file members in Massachusetts vote for Scott Brown. actually it excludes union members. Why are union members excluded until 2017? Any rational reason except politics? of course, there are no uniion members in the US so the question is irrelevant Maybe no "uniion" members. What about "union" members those tooo The meaning of your answer escapes me. a spelling joke. see the 3 o's in 'tooo'? In case you haven't guessed, "Dick the Duck" is only interested in sniping at non-conservatives who post here. |
Dems Sucker Punch Mass Union Members
HK wrote:
D.Duck wrote: bpuharic wrote: On Sat, 16 Jan 2010 21:08:44 -0500, "D.Duck" wrote: bpuharic wrote: On Sat, 16 Jan 2010 02:18:04 -0500, "D.Duck" wrote: bpuharic wrote: On Fri, 15 Jan 2010 08:15:21 -0500, C. Mor Butts wrote: The Senate health care bill, which Martha Coakley supports, contains a massive tax on the middle class which will hit union members particularly hard. The tax on so-called "Cadillac" health plans is opposed by organized labor, and could be a big reason why union rank-and-file members in Massachusetts vote for Scott Brown. actually it excludes union members. Why are union members excluded until 2017? Any rational reason except politics? of course, there are no uniion members in the US so the question is irrelevant Maybe no "uniion" members. What about "union" members those tooo The meaning of your answer escapes me. Yet another contribution from Duck that is totally devoid of content, other than the snipe. I know, that was stupid of me to say, especially since my post was totally devoid of content, except for the snipe. |
Dems Sucker Punch Mass Union Members
On Sun, 17 Jan 2010 08:14:24 -0500, "H :) K"
wrote: bpuharic wrote: a spelling joke. see the 3 o's in 'tooo'? In case you haven't guessed, "Dick the Duck" is only interested in sniping at non-conservatives who post here. yeah he does seem to be part of the herd |
Dems Sucker Punch Mass Union Members
D.Duck wrote:
H :) K wrote: D.Duck wrote: H :) K wrote: D.Duck wrote: HK wrote: D.Duck wrote: bpuharic wrote: On Sat, 16 Jan 2010 21:08:44 -0500, "D.Duck" wrote: bpuharic wrote: On Sat, 16 Jan 2010 02:18:04 -0500, "D.Duck" wrote: bpuharic wrote: On Fri, 15 Jan 2010 08:15:21 -0500, C. Mor Butts wrote: The Senate health care bill, which Martha Coakley supports, contains a massive tax on the middle class which will hit union members particularly hard. The tax on so-called "Cadillac" health plans is opposed by organized labor, and could be a big reason why union rank-and-file members in Massachusetts vote for Scott Brown. actually it excludes union members. Why are union members excluded until 2017? Any rational reason except politics? of course, there are no uniion members in the US so the question is irrelevant Maybe no "uniion" members. What about "union" members those tooo The meaning of your answer escapes me. Yet another contribution from Duck that is totally devoid of content, other than the snipe. My question was pointed at "there are no union members in the US so the question is irrelevant". If that's a "snipe" in your book, so be it. Why not start a boating thread with a topic that indicates you know something about the subject and a narrative that offers up something useful. Doing so might start a worthwhile discussion. I don't have to brag about my boat. And I'm sure I put more hours in it in one month that you do in yours for the year. I didn't ask you to post *anything* about *your* boat. Just more sniping and insulting on your part. Nothing new from you. You're just here to snipe at those who disagree with you politically. That from the king of the nastiest insults imaginable. You little POS, you are nothing more than dog **** on the bottom of my shoe. If it was legal, I would push you in front of a bus, just to save the rest of humanity from having to hear you speak. It is people like you and your nasty comments which has ruined rec.boats for good folks such as myself. |
Dems Sucker Punch Mass Union Members
On Sun, 17 Jan 2010 13:43:15 -0500, "D.Duck" wrote:
H :) K wrote: D.Duck wrote: H :) K wrote: D.Duck wrote: HK wrote: D.Duck wrote: bpuharic wrote: On Sat, 16 Jan 2010 21:08:44 -0500, "D.Duck" wrote: bpuharic wrote: On Sat, 16 Jan 2010 02:18:04 -0500, "D.Duck" wrote: bpuharic wrote: On Fri, 15 Jan 2010 08:15:21 -0500, C. Mor Butts wrote: The Senate health care bill, which Martha Coakley supports, contains a massive tax on the middle class which will hit union members particularly hard. The tax on so-called "Cadillac" health plans is opposed by organized labor, and could be a big reason why union rank-and-file members in Massachusetts vote for Scott Brown. actually it excludes union members. Why are union members excluded until 2017? Any rational reason except politics? of course, there are no uniion members in the US so the question is irrelevant Maybe no "uniion" members. What about "union" members those tooo The meaning of your answer escapes me. Yet another contribution from Duck that is totally devoid of content, other than the snipe. My question was pointed at "there are no union members in the US so the question is irrelevant". If that's a "snipe" in your book, so be it. Why not start a boating thread with a topic that indicates you know something about the subject and a narrative that offers up something useful. Doing so might start a worthwhile discussion. I don't have to brag about my boat. And I'm sure I put more hours in it in one month that you do in yours for the year. I didn't ask you to post *anything* about *your* boat. Just more sniping and insulting on your part. Nothing new from you. You're just here to snipe at those who disagree with you politically. That from the king of the nastiest insults imaginable. ....who can see no hypocrisy whatsoever in his statement. -- John H "If you think healthcare is expensive now, wait until it's free!" --Anonymous |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 07:22 AM. |
|
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com