Not to worry - someone else can pay for it.
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-53 next last
To: Libloather
2 posted on
04/04/2011 3:24:51 PM PDT by
dila813
To: Libloather
Since the Judge seems to imply it is a specious benefit, then get rid of it entirely, let them pay for their own just like I do. They can then keep the 3%.
3 posted on
04/04/2011 3:25:29 PM PDT by
wbarmy
(I chose to be a sheepdog once I saw what happens to the sheep.)
To: Libloather
The left’s strategy hasn’t changed in the last forty years. When opposing the will of the people, engage the judiciary appointed by the last leftist. Ignore the legislative process.
To: Libloather
Must be nice to be union. Everybody else has to take risks, not us chickens!
To: Libloather
Sounds like a 3% pay cut is in order.
6 posted on
04/04/2011 3:36:03 PM PDT by
Kaosinla
(The More the Plans Fail. The More the Planners Plan.)
To: Libloather
Your Honor doesn't seem lofty enough for these magnificent beings. I suggest, Your Majesty, Your Lordship, Your Exalted Ruler, Your Omnipotence...or we can just cut through all the BS and call them what they call themselves ....GOD.
7 posted on
04/04/2011 3:36:46 PM PDT by
JPG
("2012 Can't Come Soon Enough" - Sarah Palin)
To: Libloather
The judges in Michigan and Wisconsin have gone too far. They deserve to be impeached and removed. The judiciary must learn its place.
To: Libloather
What will the courts do when the states don’t have any money to pay for anything? Peobably order it be taken from the public. Will this be the straw that broke the patriot’s back?
9 posted on
04/04/2011 3:37:20 PM PDT by
Terry Mross
(Only a SECOND party will get my vote.)
To: Libloather
"He said school employees have been given no assurance that they will ever benefit. What is beyond speculation is the undisputed fact that the Legislature has the unfettered power to change or eliminate all benefits.
The same thing is true of social security and medicare.
10 posted on
04/04/2011 3:39:11 PM PDT by
verklaring
(Pyrite is not gold))
To: Diana in Wisconsin
More judicial activism, this time in Michigan.
11 posted on
04/04/2011 3:39:13 PM PDT by
Jean S
To: Libloather
We MUST find a way to rein in the out of control judiciary.
Our elected representatives do not have the fortitude to impeach them as is their job.
Impeachment is the method put in place to keep judges from becoming tinpot dictators but politicians have allowed them to do so because they can then deny any responsibility for leftist actions they really want because those actions always end up giving government more power.
12 posted on
04/04/2011 3:41:56 PM PDT by
OldMissileer
(Atlas, Titan, Minuteman, PK. Winners of the Cold War)
To: Libloather
He said school employees have been given no assurance that they will ever benefit. What is beyond speculation is the undisputed fact that the Legislature has the unfettered power to change or eliminate all benefits. If that argument holds water, than it should also hold water in declaring Soc. Sec. unconstitutional.
14 posted on
04/04/2011 3:44:22 PM PDT by
Tamar1973
(Germans in 1932 thought they were voting for change too.)
To: Libloather
unconstitutional since the health benefit isnt guaranteedWow. Maybe we can stop paying for Social Security now. It's not guaranteed either.
16 posted on
04/04/2011 3:44:47 PM PDT by
jrushing
(Anti-American-ProTerrorist-Coward-Fascist-Communist-Socialist-Democratic Party)
To: Libloather
What is beyond speculation is the undisputed fact that the Legislature has the unfettered power to change or eliminate all benefits.
That's true in the private sector also.
no sense in making the judge a liar.
legislature should do it.
Let them get their own coverage.
To: Libloather
So the court ruled that deductions for Social Security and Medicare are Unconstitutional? Wow!
19 posted on
04/04/2011 3:48:10 PM PDT by
sourcery
(If true=false, then there would be no constraints on what is possible. Hence, the world exists.)
To: Libloather
>> Ingham Circuit Judge James Giddings has ruled that requiring Michigan school employees to pay 3 percent of their wages for health-care coverage in retirement is unconstitutional since the health benefit isnt guaranteed.
Sounds like a case to be made against Obamacare.
21 posted on
04/04/2011 3:49:24 PM PDT by
Gene Eric
(*** Jesus ***)
To: Libloather
Therefore, employees are being asked to pay for a benefit they might never receive. Funny, I thought that's why they call it "insurance," a way to manage and disperse pooled risks. The judge thinks charging for insurance is illegal? WTF??
25 posted on
04/04/2011 3:54:41 PM PDT by
Carry_Okie
(The RINOcrat Party is still in charge. There has never been a conservative American government.)
To: Libloather
Liberal Logic1 - If I win, I rule.
2 - If I lose, I sue, then the courts declare me the winner, then I rule.
3 - If I lose before the courts, I revolt, declare myself the winner, then I rule.
26 posted on
04/04/2011 3:56:01 PM PDT by
Repeal 16-17
(Let me know when the Shooting starts.)
To: Libloather
Is that the dumbest reason ever? Where do they get these judges? Stupid doesn’t begin to describe him.
28 posted on
04/04/2011 3:58:35 PM PDT by
freekitty
(Give me back my conservative vote; then find me a real conservative to vote for)
To: Libloather
Laws are “Unlawful”. Go figure.
Now riddle me this, the judge ruled because he says the legislature has the unfettered discretion to take benefits away -
But it doesn’t have the discretion to charge 3% ?!
30 posted on
04/04/2011 4:01:14 PM PDT by
Williams
(It's the policies, stupid.)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-53 next last
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson