Print
Email Friend
Add to Favorites
del.icio.us
Digg It!
Slashdot It!
Most of you have heard by now that Maryland, in a moment of zealous stupidity, passed a law directed at one of it's largest employers. The law states that any company with over 10,000 employees must spend in the neighborhood of 8.5% of it's operating budget on medical insurance for it's employees.
The unions are touting this as a great victory and say they will soon roll out laws like this one across the 50 states following Maryland with Colorado, Utah and others, then going for a national law in the future.
Why not just close the door on our future once and for all. Maryland Democrats pushing the plan don't actually call this law the Screw WalMart Law, but that's what it should be called. It is claimed to be a Medicare law. They claim that all these people who work for WalMart and are not covered by health insurance either because they do not work enough hours to qualify for WalMart's medical insurance or have chosen not to accept any insurance are forced into the state's Medicare system. How is that WalMart's fault?
If they did not have a job, they would still be on Medicare, right? How can it be WalMart's fault? If I was Lee Scott I'd close down every WalMart in the state of Maryland. If the state wants to mandate how a company spends it profits then they can just find another company to take over the stores.
Look at it this way, the argument is that WalMart doesn't pay enough wages to their employees. These are the same employees that can go to work anywhere in the state where they can find a job, or they have the freedom to start their own company, but have chosen (there's that hated word for Democrats unless you are talking about abortion) to work at WalMart. As part of that choice, WalMart says "We can pay you this much money", at that point you the employee can kill the deal, just walk away, go look for something better. WalMart can not force you to work there.
Now that they are being force to spend a preset amount of their earnings on health insurance is the state going to pass a law requiring the employees to stay working there? What if WalMart spends all this money on your health insurance and you quit, should you have to pay it back? Remember, this company was forced to do this for you. It was never in your new hire package. It was never part of the deal you agreed to when you accepted the offer of employment.
The law makers and union leaders (and I use that term very loosely, look what the leadership got them at GM and Ford, forcing both to consider bankruptcy due to the inflated wages and benefits the union demanded and the end of a strike gun) say that WalMart does not do what's right when it comes to covering the costs of benefits. Well who the hell are they in the state legislature to decide what is right and wrong when it comes to paying benefits? These are the same people who want the people who work hard everyday to provide for themselves and their families to be shackled with the cost of those who are lazy and stupid.
Now many of you will freak out at that last comment, but I am not talking about those people who actually have a disability or are in an employment flux or have just gotten a divorce from the bread winner of the family and now need state assisted training to get them back into the job market and need assistance covering health and child care costs until they are back on their feet. I know those people are out there and from time to time may need help from the society at large. Don't go there with me. I am talking about those who just plain don't try, who milk the system, who are generational welfare recipients or are just too stupid to give a damn about themselves and their families.
(I tried my best to clarify that last comment but will still get the AA is a racist, bigoted, homofobe, or whatever else they will think fits)
The point is that in the past the company and the employee have been on equal footing. The company can offer something up, the employee has the right to fight it or if he or she wants to, quit. You can go start your own company and do it the way you want to. This is your right. the company on the other hand has a right to be stupid if they want. If they do not offer enough benefits to people in the community who are looking for a job, then they will not have quality people. They have the right to not offer anything, benefits are not a constitutionally guaranteed right. They are an enticement, a way to attract good people.
Just like the Quota system, it is stupid. If I go out and start a company, what right does the government have to tell me how many of what race or nationality or sex to hire? They don't but they do it anyway. If I put up the money to start a company and want the best people for the job and I have 20 applicants, 5 white men, 5 black men, 5 white women and 5 black women, and I am a serious person looking to grow my company I am going to hire based on nothing other than who is best for the job. I would end up with 10 black women on the job if they are the best qualified. It is my choice (said it again) to hire them. If I am an idiot I would hire 10 white men who might not know the first thing about what I am making or selling. Again, my choice (I know that word hurt) to be an idiot because it is my money I am putting up on the table to launch this thing. When that company goes broke and out of business who's to blame, the idiot holding the keys.
WalMart is a great company doing more for this economy than most. They provide employment in some states that are struggling and help keep prices low for all who go there. They provide competition for Target and Kmart which helps them keep their prices low. Who benefits the most from this, the people who work part time, or have low wage jobs, the poor.
As this idea spreads across the country (as I am sure it will start to get legs now) remember this, higher minimum wages, mandated health insurance and mandated retirement accounts will force WalMart and others to transfer the cost of these programs to the shopper. Don't get mad when the $.99 loaf of bread and the $2.39 gallon of milk go to $1.50 and 3.50 to cover the cost associated with the increased cost of doing business. And when this happens don't throw the blame on the business owners, they would have been happy to keep the price right where they were, but as cost goes up, so does the price.
Let's all be prochoice on this issue.
I know I am not an economist, but it seems simple enough to me. But what do I know, I'm just an Average American.
Average American, you try to rig your ratings like your sort tries to rig elections. Unfortunately, where you fail, they succeed.
But, let's push on.
Rather than motivated by an "overzealous anti-Wal-Mart" fit of pique, the MD legislature passed the bill that failed to pass a year or so ago. The current bill, essentially unchanged, passed despite an editorial in that paragon of "liberal" newsprint - always for the underdog and Ted Kennedy - the Washington Post, which argued against the bill. Yesterday, I think.
As usual, Average American, you scoot all over the board trying to uncover some justification for your
position and, as always, you blew it!
In fact, I think you pretty much miss the nub of the issue as well. As usual.
Neither is the issue nearly as simple nor is it as easy to resolve as you suggest.
And "the unions"? Unions aren't behind the drive in the dozen or so states that have similar legislation pending, regardless of what Rush says. It just ain't so! Ah, but to discover that would force you to leave your recliner and do some reading. Ever hear of a conscientious legislator - a different breed of elected official than you're used to. One that doesn't take bribes and favors from lobbyists, that kind.
Well, out there in the puckerbrush known as states, this rare and endangered species, known as conscientious legislators, is trying to balance their budgets and cope with cutbacks from the Bush Administration. That's the driving force behind those other anti-Wal-Mart bills, just as in MD.
And, Medicare? Sorry, Average, your piss and vinegar has blinded you on this one as never before. Your ignorance of the social and economic dynamics involved is unsurpassed but it's matched here by your total misunderstanding of federally-mandated assistance programs. Jeez, man!
Come back after you're able to frame the real issues, then present your case. As it stands, this is a real know-nothing, knee-jerk, emphasize jerk, article.
The thought that you're old enough to vote helps me understand why the nation is as f*cked-up as it is.
Go read AZ Moderate's posts if you need a primer in reality-based economics.
And, don't forget that admonition from the Clinton campaign -- "it's the economy, stupid!"
Report Abuse