Posted on 04/06/2005 9:56:44 AM PDT by RebelBanker
Senate joins House, OKs bill that in effect applies only to Wal-Mart; Ehrlich might veto measure; Low spending on benefits would trigger penalties
Maryland would become the first state to tax large companies that failed to meet a mandatory level of employee health-care benefits under a bill approved yesterday by the state Senate.
The measure would affect one corporation, retailing behemoth Wal-Mart Stores Inc., which sent representatives from its Bentonville, Ark., headquarters to argue against it at committee hearings this year. But other, smaller businesses worried that the measure could be altered to include them in the future.
-snip-
As a practical matter, four large Maryland employers would be covered by the bill: Wal-Mart; Giant Food Inc.; Hopkins; and defense contractor Northrop Grumman. But only Wal-Mart would be required to pay the tax because it does not reach the 8 percent threshold.
(Excerpt) Read more at baltimoresun.com ...
Yeah that is the ticket. Go after the Evil walmart! /s
I'm soooo relieved our state legislature has such important matters to deal with (dripping with sarcasm here)
Count on one Walmart closing in Md. End of problem.
Walmart may close stores and will certainly not open the planned distribution center on the Eastern Shore unless Bob Ehrlich vetos this crap and then makes the veto stick.
if walmart doesn't provide this as a benefit to their employees - the taxpayers will. I would rather walmart pay for it then see these workers on medicaid.
Considering EACH of the Sam Walton heirs are worth $18 billion, I think they can afford it.
Walmart can handle this a number of ways if Maryland becomes so hostile to business. They can reduce the number of employees by closing stores or going to more of a self serve warehouse model. They can specifically close stores in democrat leadership districts and they can simply not invest in new developments in the state. I hope the Maryland legislature thinks this through carefully.
They won't be paying - you will.
Socialism, whether by government decree, or government sponsorship, is still socialism.
Considering EACH of the Sam Walton heirs are worth $18 billion, I think they can afford it.
---
Thats not a relevant question. Why doesn't Bill Gates pay for Wall Mart health workers since he can afford it most?
All your life, you have heard yourself denounced; not for your faults, but for your greatest virtues. You have been hated, not for your mistakes, but for your achievements. You have been scorned for all those qualities of character which are your highest pride. You have been called selfish for the courage of acting on your own judgment and bearing sole responsibility for your own life. You have been called arrogant for your independent mind. You have been called cruel for your unyielding integrity. You have been called anti-social for the vision that made you venture upon undiscovered roads. You have been called ruthless for the strength and self-discipline of your drive to your purpose. You have been called greedy for the magnificence of your power to create wealth. You, who've expended an inconceivable flow of energy, have been called a parasite. You, who've created abundance where there had been nothing but wastelands and helpless, starving men before you, have been called a robber. You, who've kept them all alive, have been called an exploiter. You, the purest and most moral man among them, have been sneered at as a 'vulgar materialist.' Have you stopped to ask them: by what right? — by what code? — by what standard?
Ayn Rand
its a hell of alot more efficient for us as consumers to pay a few cents more per item so that these workers can get a health plan as part of their compensation - then to have them vote for Dems who will give them a national health care plan, run inefficiently by the government and funded with taxpayer money.
our party needs to wake up regarding what is happening with health care in the US - private employers are dumping their plans everywhere you turn. those workers will increasingly be receptive to a government run plan - and Hillary 2008 will only be too happy to give them one in exchange for their vote.
Goodbye to businesses in the People's Republic of Maryland. I only hope the whole place goes under.
It's called fascism.
Exactly--Dem economics--In DC we have an enormous tax on cigarettes. A few miles away is Virginia , one of the lowest cigarette tax states, and the DC council still doesn't get why they are not bringing in as much as they hopes with this tax.LOL If they lowered their tax and made it a few pennies less than Virginia's--they'd clean up with DC, Virginia and Md buyers flocking here.
If they lowered their sales taxes--or declared no tax days--they'd pump up business revenues (and taxes) by eliminating the premium suburban stores have built in--lower property and labor cots.
Stupid to the max.
Oh my,,,a little class warfare here on FR?
Excuse it is their money and who are we to tell them how to spend it. Also if the employee does not like to work at Walmart they could go elsewhere..
It's not socialism, it's fascism.
One Supercenter just opened in Harford Co., one is scheduled to open in Cecil in July along with a regular Wal-Mart store in Cecil. The supercenter is virtually on the MD/DE line (but in MD). The closest supercenters prior to these openings are in PA and DE - about 45 miles distant.
I have no idea what the lawmakers are trying to do here - these stores are bringing additional jobs and additional sales tax and income tax revenue into the state. I know the group from around DC cringe at the thought of Walmart entering their territory, but to impose a "tax" that is targeted at one retailer is rather short-sighted, IMHO.
Time to get on the phone ...
Kill the Medicaid program, which amounts to corporate welfare for any employer who has Medicaid recipients on their payroll, and I'm right there with you.
Why should competing retailers be forced to help keep Wal-Mart's prices down by paying taxes to support the medicaid program?
I stand corrected!
Maybe I should have stated it this way?
"Socialism, whether by government decree, or government sponsorship, is fascism."
I agree with you.. Kill medicaid..
I had a government job where my boss arranged for his staff to be very well paid per hour of work. I can be pretty sure that he would not have been quite as generous if it had been a private partnership and our pay had come out his partnership share of earnings. He might have paid us as much, but he would have granted us less vacation time than the government organization granted us and we would have had to work with greater intensity.
This observation does not mean anything negative about anyone, it is just an observation on human nature and incentives. It is so much easier to be generous with someone else's money, particularly when they are taxpayers or rich people.
Why should competing retailers be forced to help keep Wal-Mart's prices down by paying taxes to support the medicaid program?
---
The fault lies with the medicaid program, not Wallmart. Any company has a right to take full advantage of all aspects of the law to get an advantage on its competitor. Taxpayers should be outraged that people on medicaid are working at wallmart and demand it be abolished. This is another example of a failed welfare policy.
Wallmart will then have to either offer health care, or the workers will go to a job that does offer it, or will choose not to have health care or rely on some other charitable org.
It'll never happen. Wal-Mart will push them all into part-timers if they have too.
If you don't like the government paying for some freeloader's health care - then get Congress to stop paying for it!
our party needs to wake up regarding what is happening with health care in the US - private employers are dumping their plans everywhere you turn.
Because of increased costs due to government regulation. The solution is to remove government regulation and interference from the health-care *BUSINESS*!
Why is that you liberals always attack the symptoms rather than the causes?
you're right, it will never happen.
what's more likely to happen is that these workers who don't get health benefits will either go onto medicaid (as they do today), and we will pay as taxpayers. or once there is enough of them to elect Hillary, she will put national health care on all of us.
this is the price you are going to pay to save walmart a few dollars. a real good deal you are asking us to buy into.
Giving up already? Then go joint the DUmmies.
this is the price you are going to pay to save walmart a few dollars. a real good deal you are asking us to buy into.
Hey, dumbass, WAKE UP! Wal-Mart won't pay for this, you will.
This BS, unconstitutional, liberal-feelgood, anti-business legislation will not stop at Wal-Mart and I fully support Wal-Mart's tactics in fighting it. Not only will they protecting their own business interests, they will be protecting mine as well - VIVA, Wal-Mart!
p.s. If you don't like capitalism, just try doing without it.
Eventually it will be the corporations begging the government to institute HillaryCare, to take it out of their hands.
watch your language. anyone can curse on here, its real easy to type.
We are already paying for it - through medicaid, and through national health care if it comes to pass. Its alot cheaper to have walmart pay for it and raise the prices on a few of their items to cover it, along with other businesses.
that's where it heading, because people on our side just like to scream "capitalism" and not try to actually address the problem.
Looks like a bill of attainder.
Well, it *should* be out of the corporations' hands. I don't expect my employer to pay for my car, there's no reason they should pay for my health insurance either. It's just that government intrusions have made it impractical for individuals to easily get coverage.
THEY earned their money in a family-run business.
It's theirs to do with as THEY wish, and not as the duly elected shills of the People's Republic of Maryland see fit. .
I was trying to get your attention and make you think rather than type another kneejerk response.
We are already paying for it - through medicaid, and through national health care if it comes to pass.
Then change the law and quit paying for it.
Its alot cheaper to have walmart pay for it and raise the prices on a few of their items to cover it, along with other businesses.
Get government out of the health-care business and they will have to pay for it.
Is that really too difficult for you to understand?
You are addressing the symptom, not the disease, and that is destined for failure.
By what right does government do most of what it does? Quite simply, our governments, state and federal, violate our constitution every day of every week. No one shows much interest in stopping it, so I guess it'll just continue.
Carolyn
perhaps for "low level" medical care, a pay as you go model would work. and MSAs can help there. but for major medical and hospitalization, people will always need insurance.
our party needs some comprehensive solutions on health care - fast. because people who work in the private sector know exactly what is going on, their companies are shedding health care plans and retiree medical (totally gone in many cases) as fast as they can.
Get the government out of health-care and we can afford it.
I fear the morons in power are creating a monster that won't easily be put back in the box in the future.
Sam Walton was against getting involved in politics, and infact he died not having given money to either political party. For 5 years the family kept up his tradition of not getting involved politically in regards to Walmart. But in the late 90's the politicians had begun to shake Walmart down. Going after Walmart on a variety of issues, once it Walmart was so large, that it was beginning to threaten their special interest backers.
So in 1999, Walmart hired a lobbying firm in Washington, to match their competition. However still Walmart's lobbying was tiny compared to most companies. For the last 5 years though, it has been growing exponentially how much Walmart, the Waltons, and the management has been donating.. almost all to Republicans.
Infact during the 2004 election cycle, Walton's daughter gave 3.4 million dollars to conservative pac's. Which is a lot of money, but its trivial to her.. she is the richest woman in the world with 19 billion dollars... But you see the mother is 85, and the family stands to lose 8 billion dollars in taxes with the estate tax as it is now.
So they could afford to spend hundreds of millions of dollars to ensure it is overthrown. On top of that with its increasing lobbying Walmart has been pushing legislation that would benefit retailers in general. Its possible however if other companies and politicians keep playing hardball on Walmart.. Walmart will begin to play hardball back. Which is the monster I am talking about.
Everybody in the "private" system is already financing the uninsured and underinsured (Medicare and Medicaid among them), it's just a little difficult to see. Combine this with the fact that genetic testing for propensity for disease is right around the corner, and we're approaching a market where only a "super race" will be able to get insurance. Everybody else will be stuck in the lurch.
I hate to say it, but I can only see a government solution out of this. Everybody gets a taxpayer-provided catastrophic coverage policy that only pays for the necessities, and tax-deferred health savings accounts funded by payroll (or government benefit check) deductions. Its the only way I can see to keep overuse from being a problem, and losses from the poor and unfortunate being third-partied onto the rest of us. I can see rationing as part of it, too.
No, its not a pretty picture, but the alternative is worse.
We need to get all businesses more involved in politics, Wallmart included. However, what then often happens is that these businesses get so much influence that they turn from merely defending their right to do business to attempting to use government the same way their opponenets once did - by taxing competitors, regulating, red tape, subsidies, yadda yadda yadda....
In the short term, I agree thats what WalMart needs to do, but in the long term we need to shrink the power of the federal government so that it is unconstitutional for government to grant ANY special interest any favor. And nmake it unconstitutional for government to violate property laws. Then no one can take advantage of government cuz the govenment won't be in the hands of the government, it will be in the hands of the people, where it belongs.
Right now you can buy catastrophe insurance. If government steps into pay for it then these companies will go out of business. If government steps into buy health insurance for poor people then companies will shift their burden onto them. If government got out of healthcare then no private business would go out of business and taxpayers wouldn't get robbed into paying businesses healthcare.
People without healthcare would have to go to a private charitable organization. My bet is that most would start working.
"However, what then often happens is that these businesses get so much influence that they turn from merely defending their right to do business to attempting to use government the same way their opponenets once did - by taxing competitors, regulating, red tape,"
Thats the problem.. I have a feeling many start spending on politicians honestly to defend themselves. But over time less scrupulus people take the reins fo the company and use that influence to shut down competition.
"to shrink the power of the federal government so that it is unconstitutional for government to grant ANY special interest any favor. And nmake it unconstitutional for government to violate property laws"
That is the irony of some in the poor and middle classes wanting to expand the government's power. If you look what happened in Europe for example, it just gave the ultra-rich old money people so much more power and money. Because they were able to bribe and corrupt the people inside the government. While the poor and middle class couldn't do so.
The government right now is in charge of schooling for medical people. What does it do? It heavily restricts the number allowed to be trained. Only something like 16k doctors for all of America trained last year.
Luckily PA"s are coming up, and starting to spread, but right now they are still a trivial percentage of the population who can treat/perscribe medication.
The Euros got into health problems like us, from soaring costs. So they trained an army of doctors and nurses. Costs came down again, and service improved.
People try to blame perscription drugs on our health costs. Yet drugs are 250$ billion spent in 2004 in America. Versus a total of 1400$ billion spent on healthcare.
The main issue is the ridiculus cost of the labor involved. Whcih only exists because supply is limited, and silly restrictions on who can perscribe and treat by law are put on.
Can you imagine what it would cost, if you needed a doctorate of electrical engineering to put in the electrical wiring for every home in America?
And to add insult to injury only a very restricted number of those people were allowed to be trained each year?... The states had the bright idea of letting doctors decide how many doctors are allowed to be trained!!
we ought to operate health care benefit plans like 401Ks - except the employer match would be mandatory. people would use their own contributions place the match to buy their own policies. retiree medical would be totally portable - work 5 years each at 6 different companies, you've got a retiree medical nest egg just as if you worked 30 years at one company. yes, companies would have to pay for some of this - if US corporations are let off the hook completely for medical benefits, the entire system will go to the government, that is for sure.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.