"In a letter Thursday to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) and House Republican Leader John Boehner of Ohio, Caterpillar urged lawmakers to vote against the plan 'because of the substantial cost burdens it would place on our shareholders, employees and retirees.' Caterpillar, the world's largest construction machinery manufacturer by sales, said it's particularly opposed to provisions in the bill that would expand Medicare taxes and mandate insurance coverage. The legislation would require nearly all companies to provide health insurance for their employees or face large fines."
Oh, but after the health care bill is passed, Congress and the President are going to focus on jobs.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
247 comments:
«Oldest ‹Older 201 – 247 of 247Like so many other companies, Caterpillar will slash more jobs if the "healthcare" bill passes. Most of them have cut staff to the bone already in anticipation of the punishment to come but there are still jobs to be eliminated...those not axed will be required to work longer/harder to make up for departed co-workers. And they'll do whatever they're asked because the alternative is to be fired with no prospects of getting hired since no one with an ounce of sense will hire under the current anti-capitalist tyranny.
Not only does no one making policy know the slightest thing about running a business--they don't care and/or want to harm business. After all, if enough people become desperate and hopeless, the more likely they'll be to accept slavery under their government masters.
No WAY all these moves by Dems aren't intended to crash the US economy. I've tried to convince myself it's just stupidity but nobody could possibly be THAT stupid.
There is a very weak correlation with obesity and diabetes and blood pressure. That's it. (And even then, there is evidence that the arrow of causation for diabetes is that it causes obesity, not the other way around.)
That doesn't sound right. Do you have a particular study in mind?
This country developed a diabetes problem only after it developed an obesity problem. How do you explain that? The population is not significantly genetically different from two generations ago but the rate of diabetes and high blood pressure is.
If diabetes causes weight gain, then why does weight loss control blood sugar, but insulin shots don't make people lose weight.
The problem with the overweight is that they live longer and thus cost the system more.
The overweight live longer, but the Obese don't. Although, you're right that the Obese cost more than, say, smokers who develop lung cancer. Lung cancer will kill you pretty quickly, so smokers pay in more than they take out of the system. The obese can live a very long time, requiring decades of expensive treatments for their chronic conditions.
We are that stupid, we want expanded healthcare for everyone.
Since the local wing nuts are sooooooooooooo concerned about spending...
The Iraqi Invasion:
Thousands Dead, $747.3 Billion Spent And Not Any Safer
And we're still there...and we're still in Afghanistan.
The GOP is becoming more and more desperate every day:
Democrats are charging that the GOP made up a fake messaging memo that purports to be from Democrats as a way to undermine the party's message at the last minute.
The memo was circulated to reporters by a spokesman to House Minority Leader John Boehner. Politico reported on the memo and posted a story which the Drudge Report featured prominently.
"The memo is a fake," said Kristie Greco, a spokesperson for Majority Whip James Clyburn (D-S.C.). "It's an under-handed and unethical attempt to distract from the health care debate. If opponents of health insurance reform had a credible policy alternative they wouldn't have to resort to nefarious games."
Several anonymous Democratic aides similarly told Talking Points Memo's Christina Bellantoni that the memo was a trick:
"We have checked with every Democratic office, no one has ever seen it. It did not come out of a Democratic office," the aide said, adding that media outlets printing the memo have not checked with leadership offices if the memo is authentic. A second Democratic leadership aide confirmed the memo was not sent by the Democrats. A third Democratic aide also said the memo is fake, citing the "draft" stamp and saying no one uses such things.
Politico has since pulled the memo, leaving Drudge to link instead to a page that reads "UPDATE: Democrats challenge authenticity of 'doc fix' memo."
Calypso Facto said..."What you think on the subject won't matter soon because Mrs. O says that being fat is evil and once her husband is in charge of your health care he'll have all kinds of leverage to mandate behavior modification."
Good lord...some of you are beyond stupid.
Ann,
Some reflection is due from you about why you are so surprised by Obama. Millions of us not in the academic/industrial complex weren't.
How many of your fellow academics are not surprised by Obama and are happy about it?
(AP) Two-thirds of U.S. corporations paid no federal income taxes between 1998 and 2005, according to a new report from Congress.
The study by the Government Accountability Office, said about 68 percent of foreign companies doing business in the U.S. avoided corporate taxes over the same period.
Collectively, the companies reported trillions of dollars in sales, according to GAO's estimate.
We are comparing apples and oranges, and maybe monkeys here. I personally have several companies that rarely make money. I am sure that there are others here who do also. They also have no sales, so this really isn't a big tax problem for the IRS.
The reality is that most corporations make little if any money. That may sound odd, until you realize that there are millions of corporations out there in the different states, and a small percentage ever make much money. Of course, some that do, make billions. And hence your trillions of dollars of sales. But mostly by companies whose names or products most would recognize.
Yes, there are corporations that make a lot of money (in comparison with the rest of us), but pay little in federal corporate taxes (assuming that they are Sub-C corps in the first place). But don't blame them - blame Congress that has passed the tax breaks that they are utilizing to reduce their taxes. They likely have no legal requirement to pay more in taxes, and I would argue, no moral requirement either. The tax loop holes were put in the tax code by Congress, and those in Congress doing so sit on both sides of the isles.
I do find humorous the way that Jeremy argues. He throws figures out there, with no substantiation. And, as with the WHO study, are often just plain wrong. But as importantly, they just usually don't say what he means them to say.
Here, you were supposed to think that since 2/3 of corporations pay no corporate taxes, and some corporations make trillions, that a lot of tax avoidance and evasion is going on. But that is not what the factoids actually say. Rather, it is what the Jeremys of the world try to imply and make you think is true. Instead of the reality that far less than the remaining 1/3 paying taxes are making almost all of those trillions in sales.
Jeremy;
Since the local wing nuts are sooooooooooooo concerned about spending...
The Iraqi Invasion:
Thousands Dead, $747.3 Billion Spent And Not Any Safer
And we're still there...and we're still in Afghanistan.
Squirrel!!!
wv: likable. by his posts, I'd say no
Supporting the bill:
AARP
AMA (gee, what do THEY know?)
Largest Doctors And Retiree Groups
c3 - So you think the money was well spent?
c3 - Why would I possibly care if any of the wing nut tea baggers here "like" me?
Are you running for office?
Bruce Hayden said..."I personally have several companies that rarely make money. I am sure that there are others here who do also. They also have no sales, so this really isn't a big tax problem for the IRS."
So you think most of the companies they're talking about...lost money?
Get fucking real.
jvermeer51 said..."Ann,
Some reflection is due from you about why you are so surprised by Obama. Millions of us not in the academic/industrial complex weren't."
Well, isn't that something?
Unfortunately, millions of American citizens evidently thought you were wrong.
Did these people you associate with also vote for George W. Bush...twice?
How did that work out for you?
Caterpillar Opposes Health Care Bill.
AARP and AMA Support It.
That is why you are a liberal. Knee jerk anti-business, and acceptance of lobbying organizations as having merit and adding value.
So, no surprise, I would listen to Caterpillar long before I would listen to AARP or AMA.
Look, AARP doesn't represent anyone except for its management. Its primary business is selling Medicare supplements. Sure, we all get their cards when we turn 50 when the first year is free. And they were good for discounts, but AAA now typically has better discounts, and you get free towing and maps from them too.
Actually, I had great fun with my 1 year free AARP membership. I put my girlfriend, in her early 40s at the time, on as "spouse". This is the same year that she got carded at her son's college graduation party. She was not amused with her AARP card. Which is why I thought that it was so hilarious.
As the doctors here will attest, the AMA doesn't represent most doctors, average doctors, etc., but rather, a very specific minority of doctors. A demographic that is, coincidentally, far more likely to vote Democratic than the average physician. (Just like the ABA doesn't represent most lawyers, average lawyers, etc., but rather, big firm lawyers, tort lawyers, government lawyers, and academics, all more likely to vote Democratic). Indeed, just like that ABA, the AMA doctors are more likely to be those whose employers pay for their memberships, than those who have to pay for their own.
The difference here is that caterpillar sees making less money under ObamaCare, while AARP and the AMA type doctors see making more. Since Caterpillar actually contributes to GNP, both directly and indirectly, I would go with them.
Sorry.
If Cat's overall tax rate is 35%, and the benefits are nontaxable (which they are), the "cost" to the Federal Gommint in lost tax revenue is $35 million. For this one company alone.
The decline in tax revenue and economic activity that will result from the mandates in this bill, together with the costs to the states, is not scorable by budget deficit scorekeepers, but it's gonna be substantial.
Obama will be out of office before the most disastrous adverse effects of this bill are felt.
How is he going to like being remembered as the black Herbert Hoover?
Thousands Dead, $747.3 Billion Spent And Not Any Safer
True. Barack Hussein Obama managed to break through all of our defenses and terrorize the nation in ways Osama bin Laden can only dream of
And we're still there...and we're still in Afghanistan.
Wasn't the Obamessiah supposed to immediately pull us out of that? What happened there?
Jeremy said: "Good lord...some of you are beyond stupid."
Ouch. That stings coming from someone who doesn't know that market cap doesn't equal cash or that S Corps don't pay much if any income tax (because it's paid by the owners on individual returns).
And in the case of obesity regulation, I actually wish I weren't right, but it's already been discussed.
Didn't "Keep your government off my body!" used to be a chant heard in Democratic gatherings?
Calypso - don't you know that no matter what you say, Jeremy will say you're stupid.
So you think most of the companies they're talking about...lost money?
Get fucking real.
Got any evidence to the contrary or are you talking out of your ass again - after spending three whole weeks in a town that was home to a few companies which you became an expert in by libtard osmosis, of course?
Calypso - don't you know that no matter what you say, Jeremy will say you're stupid.
That's "fucking stupid".
Sounds much cooler to his "eco-friendly green Nazi neo hippy friends.
@ Alex: Oh yeah, I was being completely facetious about giving a shit what J thinks. I typically skip reading his ignorant posts (as opposed to the sometimes thoughtful Garage and Alpha dissent).
And (hope!) in What happens to the health care vote in the House when everyone knows each vote is "the" vote?
redux, there's The flare-up over Medicare...came as rank-and-file lawmakers pored over the detailed legislative language released on Thursday, and a handful of representatives said their states were being short-changed by new provisions.
Representative Peter A. DeFazio, Democratic of Oregon, who voted in favor of the bill in November, warned on Friday that he would not support the current measure unless it increased Medicare payments to states like his that provide high-quality care and comparatively lower cost.
So you think most of the companies they're talking about...lost money?
I think that you are missing the point. You posited figures that do not say what you seem to think that they say.
Let me do this more slowly. Most corporations make little if any money. And thus pay little if any taxes. Partly, this is because most businesses fail. It is hard to run a small business, and to do so long enough to make much money at it. And it is much harder to turn that small business into a medium sized one, and then, almost impossible to make it into a big one. Those are just the numbers.
For every Bill Gates who started a business in his garage, and turned it into a multi-billion dollar multi-national enterprise, there are thousands probably who ultimately failed.
The other thing that you need to keep in mind is that for small businesses, there is rarely any incentive to leaving money in the corporation and getting taxed on it. Whatever money left over is often paid out in salaries to the people who run and own the corporations. This avoids some double taxation (paying individual and corporate taxes on the same income). My father ran his law firm that way for almost 50 years before retiring. The alternative, which I utilized, and millions others have also, are Sub-S corporations, and, now even LLPs, etc., where no corporate income tax is paid because all income (less expenses) is passed through to the owners, where they pay taxes on the business income individually.
What you were trying to imply is that those 2/3 of corporations were generating a significant portion of the trillions of dollars in revenue (and note, it isn't income, it is revenue that is in the trillions). But that won't work. We all know of Microsoft with hundreds of billions in sales. They are one of the 1/3 that are paying taxes. But we don't think about all the mom and pop software companies trying to get going that aren't making money.
So, no, 2/3 not paying taxes (at presumably the corporate level) does not mean that those with the trillions in revenue are cheating on their taxes. Rather, it just means that the profitability curve is very steep. A small number (proportionally) of corporations make most of the revenue and income, and most do not.
This, BTW, also does not negate that job creation is in the small and medium sized companies. And they may not be all that profitable, since their money is going into growing, much of which is tax deductible.
WV: Bless - something that the Senate bill is not going to get from at least the RC Bishops based on its lack of anti-abortion language.
One of your tea bagger heroes is ripping off the children of the fallen:
Conservative blogger Debbie Schlussel has accused Sean Hannity's Freedom Alliance charity of unethical fundraising practices and use of money.
Schlussel points out how less than four percent of Freedom Alliance's earnings in 2006 went to the nonprofit's listed causes -- college funding for the children of fallen soldiers and care for wounded veterans.
In fact, less than 20%-and in two recent years, less than 7% and 4%, respectively-of the money raised by Freedom Alliance went to these causes, while millions of dollars went to expenses, including consultants and apparently to ferry the Hannity posse of family and friends in high style.
And, despite Hannity's statements to the contrary on his nationally syndicated radio show, few of the children of fallen soldiers got more than $1,000-$2,000, with apparently none getting more than $6,000, while Freedom Alliance appears to have spent tens of thousands of dollars for private planes.
Moreover, despite written assurances to donors that all money raised would go directly to scholarships for kids of the fallen heroes and not to expenses, Hannity has begun charging expenses of nearly $500,000 to give out just over $800,000 in scholarships.
Bruce - "Let me do this more slowly."
You can do it as slowly as you want, but this isn't something new.
This is a fact. 60% of companies pay NO federal taxes. Sure, many of them are losers (yours included), but many of them are quite profitable and have massive sales.
Trying to act as if you're some kind of business expert because you own companies that lose money is ridiculous.
Instead of disingenuous and condescending tripe, why not just accept the fact that many companies pay nada.
CNN/MONEY: 2008 -
The Government Accountability Office (GAO) examined samples of corporate tax returns filed between 1998 and 2005. In that time period, an annual average of 1.3 million U.S. companies and 39,000 foreign companies doing business in the United States paid no income taxes - despite having a combined $2.5 trillion in revenue.
And the study also showed that 28% of foreign companies and 25% of U.S. corporations with more than $250 million in assets or $50 million in sales paid no federal income taxes in 2005.
Those companies totaled a combined $372 billion in sales for the largest foreign companies and $1.1 trillion in revenue for the biggest U.S. companies.
We are likely to get reamed by Pelosithis weekend. And to add insult to historic injury, we are going to be subjected to an extended version of her bicep flex.
The Government Accountability Office (GAO) examined samples of corporate tax returns filed between 1998 and 2005. In that time period, an annual average of 1.3 million U.S. companies and 39,000 foreign companies doing business in the United States paid no income taxes - despite having a combined $2.5 trillion in revenue.
So what? What are you trying to prove with that figure?
The GOP is becoming more and more desperate every day:
Democrats are charging that the GOP made up a fake messaging memo that purports to be from Democrats as a way to undermine the party's message at the last minute.
Sounds like the GOP got hold of one of the Democrats' vile memos and the Dems are furiously doing damage control.
Because, you know, until today the Dems were doing so well getting everyone to swallow their message, passing one piece of transformative legislation after another.
LOL. You Dems are getting pretty funny in your desperation. It's like watching watching a couple hundred rats paddling around furiously, trying not to drown.
Conservative blogger Debbie Schlussel has accused Sean Hannity's Freedom Alliance charity of unethical fundraising practices and use of money.
And the relevance of this to this discussion is what?
Jeremy said: I spent many years with a company that did business throughout the world. The trip I mentioned was purely leisure travel with my wife...and yes I was only there three weeks.
Jeremy has a wife!!
Yikes.
Does she know that he is always trolling for men to suck his dick on the internet?
Bruce, you can go as slow as you want. It's not the speed that's the problem. Jeremy isn't capable of understanding.
He's too busy trying to write "tea bagger" at least 500 times on this one thread because he thinks it makes quite an impression.
Perhaps you could learn from Mr. Hayden, Jeremy:
"The vast majority of the large corporations that did not pay taxes had net losses, he said, and thus no income on which to pay taxes. “The notion that there is a large pool of untaxed corporate profits is incorrect.”
New York Times
Or maybe even from me: "In 2009, the IRS reported that the number of S corporations...represent nearly two-thirds of all U.S. corporations" Source
What a coincidence!
If you'd just stop spitting class warfare vitriol long enough to learn something....
If you'd just stop spitting class warfare vitriol long enough to learn something...
If only pigs could fly.
Caterpillar and other major manufacturers can do one thing. When union contracts come up, demand that unions contribute one half of all health care costs.
Actually that should be in the bill, but the pussy Democrats do not want to piss off the unions. That would stop the hundreds of millions of dollars unions waste on political bribes disguised as contributions.
If the unions want fair, they should pay a fair share.
It's going to quadruple the cost of premiums. You can keep your insurance if you don't mind losing your house.
Methinks and AJLynch, thanks for the kind thoughts.
The situation is heartbreaking, but we're not giving up. I guess I'm both too stupid and too stubborn, but also as AJ noted, we really do have a whale of a business model.
In better times, we'd just go down the street to another investor, but all investors right now are gravely concerned at best and scared shitless at worst as to what this government has in store for investors and the companies they invest in.
You'd think a highly innovative idea in the alternative energy area would be a near slam dunk, but the area has two problems, it is somewhat saturated in terms of VC funding and worst of all there is too much of an assumption of participation by the government underlying some of the funding.
The government presence is politicizing and ruining the sector.
Remember Thomas Paine: Don't forget to fill out your census form. For starters.
The Government Accountability Office (GAO) examined samples of corporate tax returns filed between 1998 and 2005. In that time period, an annual average of 1.3 million U.S. companies and 39,000 foreign companies doing business in the United States paid no income taxes - despite having a combined $2.5 trillion in revenue.
...and their expenditures were...what?
See, that is kinda vital info in determining taxes.
If you lose money, you don't tend to pay a heck of a lot in taxes.
Jeremy,
I ran our office in London for over a year. I was shocked to discover how many people had private insurance in order to avoid the NHS, including employees at the BBC. Paid for by the company. Which means, of course, the government. Ironic. And I was told story after story of incompetent medical care. It's chronicled almost daily in the local papers. So I don't know who you spoke with but medical care in the UK is not what you think it is.
I just got back from London. I brought copies of the newspapers with me, because I wanted to be able to illustrate to interested parties the kind of news coverage the NHS is getting.
It.Is.A.Mess.
Did I mention today that the Brits have something not so fondly referred to as the "postcode lottery" ?
google it. Rationing done by zipcode addresses.
(An NHS employed nurse friend of mine who works with disabled children's services in East London put me on to that ....)
So the French can let Diana die in an ambulance because their superior emergency services dictated that she be stabilized in an ambulance outside a hospital for 90 minutes. And Natasha Richardson's cerbral bleed goes undiagnosed for too long as her ambulance skidders around Canada looking for a hospital which can evaluate her properly because a medivac helicopter can't be provided for a large ski area. (We have two available in our rural Appalachians where we're so stupid and poor we let cousins marry ...)
We are not Europe. We are not the UK. I'd rather get sick here ... than there.
The Government Accountability Office (GAO) examined samples of corporate tax returns filed between 1998 and 2005. In that time period, an annual average of 1.3 million U.S. companies and 39,000 foreign companies doing business in the United States paid no income taxes - despite having a combined $2.5 trillion in revenue.
...and their expenditures were...what?
I don't think that the average liberal quite understands that.
EVERYONE turn up the corporate bullshit thermostat. CAT netted 3.5 billion ..NET NET NET...on revenue of 44.5 billion.
The 100 million in costs would mean that EACH employee's health care would rise $5800 a YEAR OR $500/MO. ARE YOU FRIGGING NUTS????
Opus One Media - shut up socialist fool. It's not up to you to decide how much profit CAT is allowed to make.
Jeremy;
c3 - So you think the money was well spent?
to a large extent, no. Now if you're serious about figuring out where the "savings" could come from (which I doubt) you would first go here to find out what are the "big targets".
As a next step you could go here to research how randomly "wasteful" the system is.
(BTW the Dartmouth Atlas focuses on Medicare variance. You know, that well-run governmental program that will be bankrupt in about 6 years.)
OPus One Media: Oh, and by the way, typing the wrong numbers in all caps does not make them the right numbers. Idiot.
This is one of the most depressing comments threads I've ever seen. I'm reading the comments from these business luminaries like Jeremy, and Alpha Liberal, and garage mahal, and I'm just shaking my head and thinking:
These idiots are now the people in control of our economy.
They think that rising stock prices are a big pile of cash that a company like Caterpillar can draw from. They don't realize that a company like Caterpillar already provides health insurance to their employees. They think that government-run health care will have no cost to Caterpillar. They think that it will be "self-funding".
Staggering.
Now, I'm not as expert as these three geniuses; I actually run a manufacturing business, and we sell parts to Caterpillar, and we provide health insurance to our employees. But I just can't compete with the experience and business savvy that these three have gleaned from years of liberal arts education and sipping of expensive fair-trade coffees at high-end cafes.
Why even try?
Post a Comment