Husband of RHONJ may just stop offering health insurance to his employees.

[no_hypocrisy]

-snip-

The Brownstone definitely will weigh whether to stop offering health coverage entirely, even if it must then pay a federal penalty, said Manzo.

“I may just push everybody out and say we’re not doing health care, period,” he said. “If I take the penalty and add it up and it’s less than the health care plan that I can reasonably give. Do the math. If it’s $10,000 a month to put everybody in health care, and the penalty is $5,000 a month, I’m going to throw everybody out.”

-snip-


http://www.northjersey.com/news/For_Paterson_small-business_owner_heath_care_laws_uncertainties_are_scary.html

[CBGLuthier]

1. It's a Start

This country will never be right until we separate health care from employment and multiple layers of profit.

Like EVERY civilized country in this world.

[maryellen99]

3. As someone who has watched the show

He's a repuke and they are close personal friends of Bernie Kerik.

[dipsydoodle]

8. Healthcare isn't separated from employment here in the UK with our NHS

Employers in , simple terms , pay c. 13% of gross wages, in the form of tax ,on top of the c. 12% which employes have deducted at source. Those payments , generally speaking , are made monthly in arrears to HMRC.

[Spider Jerusalem]

9. Which is partly true

but not entirely true. National Insurance contributions only make up part of NHS funding. Most of it comes from general taxation (income tax etc, per the NHS itself) and all legal UK residents are entitled to NHS care regardless of employment status or past history of National Insurance contributions.

[dipsydoodle]

12. Overall NHS contributions may well at worst only equal PAYE income tax

given that the basic rate after allowances is 20% whereas the aggregate NHS contributions are c. 24%. The contributions are treated as part of general taxation so yes of course the NHS is funded from general taxation.

Yes - all legal UK residents are entitled to NHS care regardless of employment status or past history of National Insurance contributions.....once your in you in, conception to death , including your wife and children.

[SoCalDem]

2. So, you will be giving the employees the money you used to spend on health care?

in the form of raises? right? right? right?

(cue crickets)


That said, when the briefcase brigade does start losing company-offered health care, there WILL be real change.

The $45k+ workers who usually DO have some sort of plan available will scream bloody murder if they start to lose it. sand that's when single payer universal care happens.. count on it.

[WolverineDG]

4. was this the one who had a cushy government job (with benefits) that he wasn't qualified for?

or the one who keeps getting caught DUI or driving while his license is suspended or got caught cheating on a bankruptcy petition?

[maryellen99]

6. No the one with the bankruptcy and DUI issues is Joe Giudice-Teresa's husband nt

[Vinca]

5. I'm happy to hear it. Health care shouldn't be tied to employment.

One step closer to single-payer.

[Skidmore]

7. Exactly.

[Zalatix]

13. Yup, we should be glad that his employees will now have to pay for health insurance at higher rates.

[Tennessee Gal]

10. What does he currently pay for healthcare for his employees?

Does the cost increase with ACA? If not, he has no reason to take this position.

I don't think he has a legitimate reason anyway. Unless he cares nothing for his employees and only cares about making himself wealthier, which is the Republican way.

[Skinner]

11. This is likely bullshit. Think about it.

He was already giving his employees healthcare when there was no penalty for not doing so. We can reasonably conclude that he is giving them healthcare now because he feels it is in his interest to do it.

With Obamacare, the cost of not giving healthcare will GO UP.

So, he is saying that he might decide to do something (take away health care) that he isn't currently doing, because it will become MORE EXPENSIVE to do it. It makes no sense.