Skip to main content

View Diary: white man's burden and contraception (41 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  If they did sell beer, would you allow (0+ / 0-)

    that he can pay for your soda but refuse to pay for beer at the same price?

    The analogy is deeply flawed because Jews do not believe anyone goes to hell for eating non-kosher food; the rule - g_d's rule - applies to Jews only.

    Some companies do refuse to pay for alcohol on expense vouchers, even though they know it is standard and good practice for their sales staff to provide alcohol to clients.

    We've seen that, as currently organized, health insurance is the same as an expense account. Do you object to a no-alcohol rule?

    Am I right, or am I right? - The Singing Detective

    by Clem Yeobright on Sat Feb 18, 2012 at 06:39:06 PM PST

    [ Parent ]

    •  Health insurance is NOT like an expense account (3+ / 0-)

      Health insurance is NOT the same as an expense account -- travel expenses really ARE the company's money, and they get to decide whether I fly first class, coach, or don't travel at all.

      Consider health spending accounts -- employees contribute their OWN money. And for the health plans, I get a choice of 4 -- the company pays a fixed amount regardless of which I choose -- because that's part of my compensation. And I don't account to the company for any of my health care -- it's none of their business.

      Enough. I don't know why you think that two things treated the same by tax law are therefore the same. That wouldn't be a compelling argument even without the many other differences.

      •  If it's compensation, pay your damn taxes. (0+ / 0-)

        FYI: I have always paid my health insurance with after-tax money, i.e., out of my taxable compensation.

        Am I right, or am I right? - The Singing Detective

        by Clem Yeobright on Sat Feb 18, 2012 at 06:55:52 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site