On 2/1/14, 7:11 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 2/1/2014 6:54 PM, F.O.A.D. wrote:
On 2/1/14, 6:32 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 2/1/2014 6:08 PM, F.O.A.D. wrote:
On 2/1/14, 5:59 PM, Tim wrote:
On Saturday, February 1, 2014 8:05:54 AM UTC-6, F.O.A.D. wrote:


What, that we have a country that allows corporations to fire someone

because they get sick? What a wonderful country.


What does the wrong doing of company have to do with this country?
Does she not have a legal team working on the situation? The article
says she does...


In most more rational western countries, the woman wouldn't have been
fired because she took ill, because her health insurance would not have
been something supplied via her employer. But that's the way we
allow it
to be in this country...fired because you got sick and might impact the
company's health insurance premiums. *That* is sick.



Was that the reason she was fired? I don't know because her lawsuit
hasn't hit the courts yet and we haven't heard what the company has to
say.

That said though, I agree, it's yet another example of why businesses
making widgets shouldn't be the provider or even administrator of health
insurance plans. Government passing laws that force businesses to
retain employees even as the health insurance premiums rise
exponentially isn't doing anything to help anybody.


Indeed, health insurance should not be subject to the employer's whim.
Neither should defined benefit pensions. Too many workers have been
screwed out of pensions because their employers used the funds for
something else or allowed unfunded liabilities to skyrocket.




Life's a bitch and then you die. If you spend it depending on someone
else to protect and provide for you, you are doomed to getting your ass
kicked.





Wow. You are giving employers a pass for bad behavior.

--
There’s no point crying over spilled 4-Methylcyclohexanemethanol.

"F.O.A.D." wrote:
On 2/1/14, 7:00 PM, Califbill wrote:
"F.O.A.D." wrote:
On 2/1/14, 6:32 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 2/1/2014 6:08 PM, F.O.A.D. wrote:
On 2/1/14, 5:59 PM, Tim wrote:
On Saturday, February 1, 2014 8:05:54 AM UTC-6, F.O.A.D. wrote:


What, that we have a country that allows corporations to fire someone

because they get sick? What a wonderful country.


What does the wrong doing of company have to do with this country?
Does she not have a legal team working on the situation? The article
says she does...


In most more rational western countries, the woman wouldn't have been
fired because she took ill, because her health insurance would not have
been something supplied via her employer. But that's the way we allow it
to be in this country...fired because you got sick and might impact the
company's health insurance premiums. *That* is sick.



Was that the reason she was fired? I don't know because her lawsuit
hasn't hit the courts yet and we haven't heard what the company has to say.

That said though, I agree, it's yet another example of why businesses
making widgets shouldn't be the provider or even administrator of health
insurance plans. Government passing laws that force businesses to
retain employees even as the health insurance premiums rise
exponentially isn't doing anything to help anybody.


Indeed, health insurance should not be subject to the employer's whim.
Neither should defined benefit pensions. Too many workers have been
screwed out of pensions because their employers used the funds for
something else or allowed unfunded liabilities to skyrocket.





Sort of like the unfunded public pensions? How many cities have or are
going to declare bankruptcy over unfunded liabilities?



I don't recall excluding public employers from my comment about unfunded
pension liabilities.

My local union's pension fund does not allow unfunded liabilities.
Adjustments are made in other areas when necessary.


I found the insinuation to be private employers. Sorry.

On 2/1/2014 7:16 PM, F.O.A.D. wrote:
On 2/1/14, 7:11 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 2/1/2014 6:54 PM, F.O.A.D. wrote:
On 2/1/14, 6:32 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 2/1/2014 6:08 PM, F.O.A.D. wrote:
On 2/1/14, 5:59 PM, Tim wrote:
On Saturday, February 1, 2014 8:05:54 AM UTC-6, F.O.A.D. wrote:


What, that we have a country that allows corporations to fire
someone

because they get sick? What a wonderful country.


What does the wrong doing of company have to do with this country?
Does she not have a legal team working on the situation? The article
says she does...


In most more rational western countries, the woman wouldn't have been
fired because she took ill, because her health insurance would not
have
been something supplied via her employer. But that's the way we
allow it
to be in this country...fired because you got sick and might impact
the
company's health insurance premiums. *That* is sick.



Was that the reason she was fired? I don't know because her lawsuit
hasn't hit the courts yet and we haven't heard what the company has to
say.

That said though, I agree, it's yet another example of why businesses
making widgets shouldn't be the provider or even administrator of
health
insurance plans. Government passing laws that force businesses to
retain employees even as the health insurance premiums rise
exponentially isn't doing anything to help anybody.


Indeed, health insurance should not be subject to the employer's whim.
Neither should defined benefit pensions. Too many workers have been
screwed out of pensions because their employers used the funds for
something else or allowed unfunded liabilities to skyrocket.




Life's a bitch and then you die. If you spend it depending on someone
else to protect and provide for you, you are doomed to getting your ass
kicked.





Wow. You are giving employers a pass for bad behavior.


Not at all.

On Sat, 01 Feb 2014 17:30:14 -0500, "F.O.A.D." wrote:

On 2/1/14, 4:53 PM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Sat, 01 Feb 2014 09:05:54 -0500, "F.O.A.D." wrote:

On 2/1/14, 8:38 AM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Fri, 31 Jan 2014 21:06:03 -0500, "F.O.A.D." wrote:

http://tinyurl.com/mntn3y7

I can think of only two people who would use that story to indict the USA.



What, that we have a country that allows corporations to fire someone
because they get sick? What a wonderful country.

A person got fired - justly or unjustly. If justly, the country did nothing wrong. If unjustly, then
the employer is at fault. How do you possibly get off indicting the USA for this action?

I really can't understand why anyone responds to any of your ****.



There you go again, with the personal insults.

Read what you wrote. What you wrote was an indictment of America based on what one woman gave as her
side of a story.

It was ****. We've all written some **** in our time. That happened to be an example of yours.

On 2/1/14, 9:08 PM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Sat, 01 Feb 2014 17:30:14 -0500, "F.O.A.D." wrote:

On 2/1/14, 4:53 PM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Sat, 01 Feb 2014 09:05:54 -0500, "F.O.A.D." wrote:

On 2/1/14, 8:38 AM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Fri, 31 Jan 2014 21:06:03 -0500, "F.O.A.D." wrote:

http://tinyurl.com/mntn3y7

I can think of only two people who would use that story to indict the USA.



What, that we have a country that allows corporations to fire someone
because they get sick? What a wonderful country.

A person got fired - justly or unjustly. If justly, the country did nothing wrong. If unjustly, then
the employer is at fault. How do you possibly get off indicting the USA for this action?

I really can't understand why anyone responds to any of your ****.



There you go again, with the personal insults.

Read what you wrote. What you wrote was an indictment of America based on what one woman gave as her
side of a story.

It was ****. We've all written some **** in our time. That happened to be an example of yours.


I'm not engaging in personal insults against other posters here. You
are. Period. It's perfectly within your rights to not like my political
opinions, as it is within my rights to not like your political opinions.
No need to make it personal.

--
There’s no point crying over spilled 4-Methylcyclohexanemethanol.

On Sat, 01 Feb 2014 19:07:01 -0500, "F.O.A.D." wrote:

On 2/1/14, 7:00 PM, Califbill wrote:
"F.O.A.D." wrote:
On 2/1/14, 6:32 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 2/1/2014 6:08 PM, F.O.A.D. wrote:
On 2/1/14, 5:59 PM, Tim wrote:
On Saturday, February 1, 2014 8:05:54 AM UTC-6, F.O.A.D. wrote:


What, that we have a country that allows corporations to fire someone

because they get sick? What a wonderful country.


What does the wrong doing of company have to do with this country?
Does she not have a legal team working on the situation? The article
says she does...


In most more rational western countries, the woman wouldn't have been
fired because she took ill, because her health insurance would not have
been something supplied via her employer. But that's the way we allow it
to be in this country...fired because you got sick and might impact the
company's health insurance premiums. *That* is sick.



Was that the reason she was fired? I don't know because her lawsuit
hasn't hit the courts yet and we haven't heard what the company has to say.

That said though, I agree, it's yet another example of why businesses
making widgets shouldn't be the provider or even administrator of health
insurance plans. Government passing laws that force businesses to
retain employees even as the health insurance premiums rise
exponentially isn't doing anything to help anybody.


Indeed, health insurance should not be subject to the employer's whim.
Neither should defined benefit pensions. Too many workers have been
screwed out of pensions because their employers used the funds for
something else or allowed unfunded liabilities to skyrocket.





Sort of like the unfunded public pensions? How many cities have or are
going to declare bankruptcy over unfunded liabilities?



I don't recall excluding public employers from my comment about unfunded
pension liabilities.

My local union's pension fund does not allow unfunded liabilities.
Adjustments are made in other areas when necessary.

Damn shame Detroit wasn't run by your local union.

On 2/1/14, 9:10 PM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Sat, 01 Feb 2014 19:07:01 -0500, "F.O.A.D." wrote:

On 2/1/14, 7:00 PM, Califbill wrote:
"F.O.A.D." wrote:
On 2/1/14, 6:32 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 2/1/2014 6:08 PM, F.O.A.D. wrote:
On 2/1/14, 5:59 PM, Tim wrote:
On Saturday, February 1, 2014 8:05:54 AM UTC-6, F.O.A.D. wrote:


What, that we have a country that allows corporations to fire someone

because they get sick? What a wonderful country.


What does the wrong doing of company have to do with this country?
Does she not have a legal team working on the situation? The article
says she does...


In most more rational western countries, the woman wouldn't have been
fired because she took ill, because her health insurance would not have
been something supplied via her employer. But that's the way we allow it
to be in this country...fired because you got sick and might impact the
company's health insurance premiums. *That* is sick.



Was that the reason she was fired? I don't know because her lawsuit
hasn't hit the courts yet and we haven't heard what the company has to say.

That said though, I agree, it's yet another example of why businesses
making widgets shouldn't be the provider or even administrator of health
insurance plans. Government passing laws that force businesses to
retain employees even as the health insurance premiums rise
exponentially isn't doing anything to help anybody.


Indeed, health insurance should not be subject to the employer's whim.
Neither should defined benefit pensions. Too many workers have been
screwed out of pensions because their employers used the funds for
something else or allowed unfunded liabilities to skyrocket.





Sort of like the unfunded public pensions? How many cities have or are
going to declare bankruptcy over unfunded liabilities?



I don't recall excluding public employers from my comment about unfunded
pension liabilities.

My local union's pension fund does not allow unfunded liabilities.
Adjustments are made in other areas when necessary.

Damn shame Detroit wasn't run by your local union.


It's a sad example, as are the examples of many corporations that have
screwed their employees out of their pensions. What do you think ought
to be done about it?

--
There’s no point crying over spilled 4-Methylcyclohexanemethanol.

"F.O.A.D." wrote:
On 2/1/14, 9:10 PM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Sat, 01 Feb 2014 19:07:01 -0500, "F.O.A.D." wrote:

On 2/1/14, 7:00 PM, Califbill wrote:
"F.O.A.D." wrote:
On 2/1/14, 6:32 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 2/1/2014 6:08 PM, F.O.A.D. wrote:
On 2/1/14, 5:59 PM, Tim wrote:
On Saturday, February 1, 2014 8:05:54 AM UTC-6, F.O.A.D. wrote:


What, that we have a country that allows corporations to fire someone

because they get sick? What a wonderful country.


What does the wrong doing of company have to do with this country?
Does she not have a legal team working on the situation? The article
says she does...


In most more rational western countries, the woman wouldn't have been
fired because she took ill, because her health insurance would not have
been something supplied via her employer. But that's the way we allow it
to be in this country...fired because you got sick and might impact the
company's health insurance premiums. *That* is sick.



Was that the reason she was fired? I don't know because her lawsuit
hasn't hit the courts yet and we haven't heard what the company has to say.

That said though, I agree, it's yet another example of why businesses
making widgets shouldn't be the provider or even administrator of health
insurance plans. Government passing laws that force businesses to
retain employees even as the health insurance premiums rise
exponentially isn't doing anything to help anybody.


Indeed, health insurance should not be subject to the employer's whim.
Neither should defined benefit pensions. Too many workers have been
screwed out of pensions because their employers used the funds for
something else or allowed unfunded liabilities to skyrocket.





Sort of like the unfunded public pensions? How many cities have or are
going to declare bankruptcy over unfunded liabilities?



I don't recall excluding public employers from my comment about unfunded
pension liabilities.

My local union's pension fund does not allow unfunded liabilities.
Adjustments are made in other areas when necessary.

Damn shame Detroit wasn't run by your local union.


It's a sad example, as are the examples of many corporations that have
screwed their employees out of their pensions. What do you think ought to be done about it?


Make all pensions 401k types. You get the money to invest every year. If
you spend the money, even with the penalty, before retirement, you starve
when you retire. That way If you stay less than vesting time, you still
get a retirement fund.

On Saturday, February 1, 2014 8:16:15 PM UTC-6, F.O.A.D. wrote:
On 2/1/14, 9:10 PM, Poco Loco wrote:

On Sat, 01 Feb 2014 19:07:01 -0500, "F.O.A.D." wrote:



On 2/1/14, 7:00 PM, Califbill wrote:

"F.O.A.D." wrote:

On 2/1/14, 6:32 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:

On 2/1/2014 6:08 PM, F.O.A.D. wrote:

On 2/1/14, 5:59 PM, Tim wrote:

On Saturday, February 1, 2014 8:05:54 AM UTC-6, F.O.A.D. wrote:





What, that we have a country that allows corporations to fire someone



because they get sick? What a wonderful country.





What does the wrong doing of company have to do with this country?

Does she not have a legal team working on the situation? The article

says she does...





In most more rational western countries, the woman wouldn't have been

fired because she took ill, because her health insurance would not have

been something supplied via her employer. But that's the way we allow it

to be in this country...fired because you got sick and might impact the

company's health insurance premiums. *That* is sick.







Was that the reason she was fired? I don't know because her lawsuit

hasn't hit the courts yet and we haven't heard what the company has to say.



That said though, I agree, it's yet another example of why businesses

making widgets shouldn't be the provider or even administrator of health

insurance plans. Government passing laws that force businesses to

retain employees even as the health insurance premiums rise

exponentially isn't doing anything to help anybody.





Indeed, health insurance should not be subject to the employer's whim.

Neither should defined benefit pensions. Too many workers have been

screwed out of pensions because their employers used the funds for

something else or allowed unfunded liabilities to skyrocket.











Sort of like the unfunded public pensions? How many cities have or are

going to declare bankruptcy over unfunded liabilities?







I don't recall excluding public employers from my comment about unfunded

pension liabilities.



My local union's pension fund does not allow unfunded liabilities.

Adjustments are made in other areas when necessary.



Damn shame Detroit wasn't run by your local union.





It's a sad example, as are the examples of many corporations that have

screwed their employees out of their pensions.

Harry, don't think corporations are the lone rangers...

http://www.workforcefreedom.com/blog...scam-taxpayers

On Sat, 01 Feb 2014 19:15:32 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

That means the "country" did not fail
her, as presented by out resident liberal in chief and general
anti-establishment advocate. :-)

===

Unfortunately his twisted mind probably considers that a compliment.