|
| FOR MY WALMART BASHING FRIENDS |
| Tuesday, February 28, 2006 |
| OpinionJournal - The Western Front: "Always High Taxes
The war on Wal-Mart is really about expanding government." |
posted by Jack Mercer @ 2/28/2006 09:52:00 PM   |
|
| 1 Comments: |
-
That's an interesting article. I find this Wal-Mart issue to be perplexing. I haven't formed a strong opinion one way or the other yet.
I can say that, despite Miniter's objections, the law requiring companies of over 10,000 employees to pay 8% of their payroll on health care seems like a good one to me.
As it stands now, Wal-Mart engages in "questionable" practices by hiring two part time workers to do one full time worker's job. This allows them to avoid paying benefits. Because there are now two part time workers making paltry incomes which can't possibly support them, and they have no health care coverage, Wal-Mart actually suggests they get on welfare. Now the burden is shifted to the taxpayer.
I understand Miniter's reservations. This legislation is government forcing private industry's hand, but what are the alternatives? I'm honestly not sure, and I haven't heard any as of yet.
|
| |
| << Home |
| |
|
|
|
| About Me |
|
Name: Jack Mercer
Home:
About Me:
See my complete profile
"Snipet" (pronounced: snipe - it) is not a word.It is a derivative of two words: "Snipe" and "Snippet".
Miriam Webster defines Snipe as: to aim a carping or snide attack, or: to shoot at exposed individuals (as of an enemy's forces) from a usually concealed point of vantage.
Miriam Webster defines Snippet as: : a small part, piece, or thing; especially : a brief quotable passage.
In short, "Snipets" are brief, snide shots at exposed situations from a concealed vantage point.
WARNING! With due reverence to the Bill of Rights and the First Amendment there is NO comment policy on the News Snipet.
|
| Other things |
| Archives |
|
| Politics |
|
| Template by |
|
|
That's an interesting article. I find this Wal-Mart issue to be perplexing. I haven't formed a strong opinion one way or the other yet.
I can say that, despite Miniter's objections, the law requiring companies of over 10,000 employees to pay 8% of their payroll on health care seems like a good one to me.
As it stands now, Wal-Mart engages in "questionable" practices by hiring two part time workers to do one full time worker's job. This allows them to avoid paying benefits. Because there are now two part time workers making paltry incomes which can't possibly support them, and they have no health care coverage, Wal-Mart actually suggests they get on welfare. Now the burden is shifted to the taxpayer.
I understand Miniter's reservations. This legislation is government forcing private industry's hand, but what are the alternatives? I'm honestly not sure, and I haven't heard any as of yet.