My love life is none of your business, now buy me stuff when I want to have love.

[DrenDran]

I think that uh, companies should be uh, forced to buy food for their employees.
I mean food is a basic human need, but here companies aren't even required to provide it for their employees?
This is outrageous, no wonder hunger and unhealthy eating is such a problem in America!


Also:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kYCNyEZIlCQ
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LYiEPpyzYPM

[Ad Bot]

[Edoircs]

You're agreeing with them? The reason the company is paying you to work is so you can live. They may as well raise your pay and expect you to buy useless stuff. People just need to learn to manage their money.

[kyle222]

You're agreeing with them? The reason the company is paying you to work is so you can live. They may as well raise your pay and expect you to buy useless stuff. People just need to learn to manage their money.

sarcasm is a thing that drendran is obviously using

[Edoircs]

sarcasm is a thing that this man is obviously using

Alright. But it's mostly to the ignorant forgets on the videos

[Decepticon]

is that first video of people protesting abortion etc and using the excuse "birth control pills are better!11!!"

because that's just really

ugh

[SeventhSandwich]

These guys are idiots. The reason why this is a poor ruling is that these employees are promised employer-sponsered healthcare and the ruling allows any employer to selectively pick which medications they want to cover as part of their health care plan on the basis of 'religious freedom'. It doesn't even matter whether it's birth control really, since the ruling could also cover antibiotics, or flu shots, or anything else that someone could possibly religiously object to.

It's a dumb ruling because Hobby Lobby promises healthcare and isn't providing it to their employees, and the government is protecting their right to lie to their employees.

If you wanted to make your food brown townogy accurate, it would be like if Hobby Lobby took part of your paychecks and said, "Hey, we'll let you use this to cover your food so that you can't ever go starving. It's fine though since you can still get whatever you want!" and then immediately you go to purchase bananas, and they turn around and say "Sorry, we religiously object to phallic foods, so you're gonna have to eat anchovies or cherries or something for dinner, sorry!". Sound fair?

[Caribou]

I think it's the job of the employee to provide for themselves. The sole purpose of an employer is to provide the worker with a job of course, and a salary -- (that is unless it is a volunteer job).

[kyle222]

there's a saying i heard of a few times
women aren't smart
men aren't smart
a woman can be smart, and a man can be smart (because individuals)

these women are not smart.

[DrenDran]

These guys are idiots. The reason why this is a poor ruling is that these employees are promised employer-sponsered healthcare and the ruling allows any employer to selectively pick which medications they want to cover as part of their health care plan on the basis of 'religious freedom'. It doesn't even matter whether it's birth control really, since the ruling could also cover antibiotics, or flu shots, or anything else that someone could possibly religiously object to.

It's a dumb ruling because Hobby Lobby promises healthcare and isn't providing it to their employees, and the government is protecting their right to lie to their employees.

If you wanted to make your food brown townogy accurate, it would be like if Hobby Lobby took part of your paychecks and said, "Hey, we'll let you use this to cover your food so that you can't ever go starving. It's fine though since you can still get whatever you want!" and then immediately you go to purchase bananas, and they turn around and say "Sorry, we religiously object to phallic foods, so you're gonna have to eat anchovies or cherries or something for dinner, sorry!". Sound fair?

So the solution here is to just pay people with actual money rather than benefits that every worker (indirectly) pays for, yet may or may not actually use?

[Edoircs]

So the solution here is to just pay people with actual money rather than benefits that every worker (indirectly) pays for, yet may or may not actually use?

No. People need to learn how to manage their loving money. It's possible to live. It's been done for years. I promise it's possible to live without more stuff.

[SeventhSandwich]

So the solution here is to just pay people with actual money rather than benefits that every worker (indirectly) pays for, yet may or may not actually use?

No, employer-sponsered health care is a beautiful thing. It's how 90% of Americans manage to pay for expensive medications, and it works because employers pay much less than a dollar for every dollar of healthcare you receive. It's like CostCo in a round-about way.

The problem here is that no one is saying that Hobby Lobby employers/managers/etc have to buy birth control pills for themselves. They've ruled that they have the right not to let their employees use their insurance to buy birth control, but think of how this can be exploited. What if a company decides, "Hey, our employees are all using their insurance a lot during winter getting these /flu shots/, why don't we tell them we religiously object to that, so that we don't have to pay for that anymore"?

Or even with birthcontrol, what if your employee has a condition that requires contraceptives as part of treatment? What are they gonna do?

No. People need to learn how to manage their loving money. It's possible to live. It's been done for years. I promise it's possible to live without more stuff.

I guarantee that your parents get their health insurance from their jobs. Otherwise, you're loaded and should probably just shut the forget up since you didn't make any of that money.

[DrenDran]

No. People need to learn how to manage their loving money. It's possible to live. It's been done for years. I promise it's possible to live without more stuff.

How is that a disagreement?
I think you need to reread the posts in this thread.

No, employer-sponsered health care is a beautiful thing. It's how 90% of Americans manage to pay for expensive medications, and it works because employers pay much less than a dollar for every dollar of healthcare you receive. It's like CostCo in a round-about way.

The problem here is that no one is saying that Hobby Lobby employers/managers/etc have to buy birth control pills for themselves. They've ruled that they have the right not to let their employees use their insurance to buy birth control, but think of how this can be exploited. What if a company decides, "Hey, our employees are all using their insurance a lot during winter getting these /flu shots/, why don't we tell them we religiously object to that, so that we don't have to pay for that anymore"?

Or even with birthcontrol, what if your employee has a condition that requires contraceptives as part of treatment? What are they gonna do?

It seems like socialized healthcare is actually best for capitalism.
That said, this argument has nothing to do with religion and everything to do with property rights.

[SeventhSandwich]

It seems like socialized healthcare is actually best for capitalism.

I can agree with that.

[Edoircs]

I guarantee that your parents get their health insurance from their jobs. Otherwise, you're loaded and should probably just shut the forget up since you didn't make any of that money.

Yes, but the went through years of education to get their insurance. So someone with a highschool education get offered just as much insurance as someone with a college degree? No, if they are too lazy or can't go and seek scholarships for college, that's their own damn fault. Not the companies.

[ZombiLoin]

Yes, but the went through years of education to get their insurance. So someone with a highschool education get offered just as much insurance as someone with a college degree? No, if they are too lazy or can't go and seek scholarships for college, that's their own damn fault. Not the companies.

Y
You do know college costs have skyrocketed since the 80's right?