Comments on: Employers cannot escape The Obamacare

By: RickCaird

RickCaird — Thu, 29 May 2014 18:28:57 +0000

I would like to know where the IRS gets the legal authority to level the $100/day fine. I have a feeling that is another administrative rule that could not survive a court challenge.

By: ConradCA

ConradCA — Thu, 29 May 2014 04:33:37 +0000

Look at the bumper stickers on their cars and layoff those with Obama or Democratic leanings. Furthermore, they should have promised that if Tyrant Obama the Liar was reelected their would be massive layoffs.

By: ConradCA

ConradCA — Thu, 29 May 2014 04:31:23 +0000

“But if Congress did pass such a law to clarify their intent exactly what would be the theory of the intent? As I see it that intent would be to give employers the flexibility to burden the government with more subsidies to those who can’t afford the premiums. Which would be a curious intent indeed and not one to which many fiscal conservatives would sign on.”

What your arguing for is making it illegal to fire people. The results of Tyrant Obama the Liar’s decree is that businesses will fire more people and more of them will go out of business.

By: JackRussellTerrierist

JackRussellTerrierist — Thu, 29 May 2014 04:03:21 +0000

Obastard has actually said that about small business, in slightly different words.

By: JohnC

JohnC — Wed, 28 May 2014 14:42:20 +0000

Obama: Dear business owners: You are all hereby ordered to go bankrupt. Have a nice day.

By: Roux

Roux — Wed, 28 May 2014 12:21:47 +0000

The American Hospital Association, AMA and insurance industry were all-in on Obamecare. They are slowly regretting their support.

By: Roux

Roux — Wed, 28 May 2014 12:18:10 +0000

The media had run a few stories about his wife and kids. I think it was a veiled threat.

By: Steven H

Steven H — Wed, 28 May 2014 03:32:26 +0000

Promulgating the rules under laws is what the executive is supposed to do. This is how all laws are implemented and enforced. Congress has the power to clarify the law by passing more legislation if they think the rules run counter their intent.

But if Congress did pass such a law to clarify their intent exactly what would be the theory of the intent? As I see it that intent would be to give employers the flexibility to burden the government with more subsidies to those who can’t afford the premiums. Which would be a curious intent indeed and not one to which many fiscal conservatives would sign on.

By: Milwaukee

Milwaukee — Wed, 28 May 2014 02:36:22 +0000

0bamaCare: The gift that keeps on giving. Or was that the clap?

You know how some legal documents have this oxymoron “This page has been deliberately left blank.”? Did they have blank pages so they could fill them in later?

By: n.n

n.n — Wed, 28 May 2014 02:19:13 +0000

Survivor’s tax.

By: smfoushee

smfoushee — Wed, 28 May 2014 02:14:54 +0000

Wouldn’t this new ruling be grounds for a new series of lawsuits? The government is now saying not only are individuals forced to buy health insurance, but employers are forced to provide non-government led health insurance to all employees. Government is now essentially forcing companies to pay a minimum benefit to employees, certainly that doesn’t pass the tax-test.

By: Humphrey's Executor

Humphrey's Executor — Wed, 28 May 2014 01:56:11 +0000

This is exactly what I’m doing in my little enterprise and was told a could do by my accountant and insurance agent. And I knew it was too good to be true. I wonder when this new f’ing rule takes effect.

By: Fen

Fen — Wed, 28 May 2014 01:41:31 +0000

“And now I turn my attention to my own employees in the Executive Branch. All of you – including the IRS, EPA, FBI and DHS – are fired. You may not apply for a state or federal job for a period of 8 years”

By: Fen

Fen — Wed, 28 May 2014 01:35:18 +0000

Jan. 20, 2017 1pm

The President: “With this pen, I sign my first Executive Order, granting Universal Waivers from the Affordable Care Act to every American”

By: stevewhitemd

stevewhitemd — Wed, 28 May 2014 01:28:41 +0000

Somewhere in the 2000+ pages there’s undoubtedly a regulation (put there by the ever thoughtful Chuckie Schumer and Barney Frank) that lets the IRS do whatever it pleases. They did that on the Dodd-Frank Act — wrote the regulations to be so vague as to let the SEC do whatever it wants. So I’m guessing the IRS got the same privilege.

By: Neo

Neo — Wed, 28 May 2014 01:22:56 +0000

The obvious solution is to make all your employees “paet-time”

By: Henry Hawkins

Henry Hawkins — Wed, 28 May 2014 00:29:42 +0000

These ongoing Obamacare amendments are mostly for staving off the bad stuff till after the 2012 election – and now the 2014 midterms – and likely the 2016 presidential as well.

I know there are multitudes of lawsuits over various aspects of the law, but at some point you have to hope some sensible federal judge is going to strike the whole monstrosity down as unconstitutionally constructed in ad hoc fashion without proper involvement of congress.

You have to hope…

By: MarkS

MarkS — Wed, 28 May 2014 00:11:45 +0000

Roberts? Don’t know who had what on him, but it must be a doozie!

By: dmacleo

dmacleo — Tue, 27 May 2014 23:52:34 +0000

sort of pisses me off that benefits given were a direct result of feds interfering with max wages a company could pay so company offered benefits instead and now those benefits are considered a right.
if I owned a large company I think I would eat the costs and break apart into thousand 40 employee units and fire the excess.
votes matter people.

By: genes

genes — Tue, 27 May 2014 23:36:05 +0000

If they did that, they would have to reduce staffing by 50 to 90%, depending on agency.