Main Menu |
Most Favorited Images |
Recently Uploaded Images |
Most Liked Images |
Top Reviewers |
cockalatte |
649 |
MoneyManMatt |
490 |
Still Looking |
399 |
samcruz |
399 |
Jon Bon |
397 |
Harley Diablo |
377 |
honest_abe |
362 |
DFW_Ladies_Man |
313 |
Chung Tran |
288 |
lupegarland |
287 |
nicemusic |
285 |
Starscream66 |
281 |
You&Me |
281 |
George Spelvin |
270 |
sharkman29 |
256 |
|
Top Posters |
DallasRain | 70817 | biomed1 | 63509 | Yssup Rider | 61155 | gman44 | 53310 | LexusLover | 51038 | offshoredrilling | 48769 | WTF | 48267 | pyramider | 46370 | bambino | 43001 | The_Waco_Kid | 37301 | CryptKicker | 37225 | Mokoa | 36497 | Chung Tran | 36100 | Still Looking | 35944 | Mojojo | 33117 |
|
|
07-05-2013, 03:18 PM
|
#31
|
Valued Poster
Join Date: Jan 16, 2010
Location: Texas
Posts: 51,038
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by CJ7
I bet you can provide a list of big businesses that donate more $$ to the dems than they do the repubs cant you ?
ready set GO !
|
Do you count the ones that received Federal assistance because that would be taxpayer donations from those companies?
|
|
Quote
| 1 user liked this post
|
07-05-2013, 03:49 PM
|
#32
|
Valued Poster
Join Date: Feb 9, 2010
Location: Here
Posts: 14,191
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by LexusLover
Do you count the ones that received Federal assistance because that would be taxpayer donations from those companies?
|
like walmart (# 1 or 2 on Fortune 500's list) who pays their employees so little, the employees are on food stamps and medicare?
anything on that FINE PRINT yet?
|
|
Quote
| 1 user liked this post
|
07-05-2013, 04:16 PM
|
#33
|
Valued Poster
Join Date: Feb 9, 2010
Location: Here
Posts: 14,191
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by LexusLover
the number of employees doesn't matter for Obaminable Care ...
........... it is based on gross revenues of the company, not the number of employees.
Read the fine print. What the hell do you think the IRS was supposed to be doing?
Examining the books, assessing responsibility, evaluating compliance, and then taxing!
|
still waiting on that FINE PRINT
|
|
Quote
| 1 user liked this post
|
07-05-2013, 04:23 PM
|
#34
|
Valued Poster
Join Date: Jan 16, 2010
Location: Texas
Posts: 51,038
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by CJ7
still waiting on that FINE PRINT
|
You can't find it? Or you can't read? Or both?
|
|
Quote
| 1 user liked this post
|
07-05-2013, 04:24 PM
|
#35
|
Valued Poster
Join Date: Feb 9, 2010
Location: Here
Posts: 14,191
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by LexusLover
You can't find it? Or you can't read? Or both?
|
neither , you cant produce it
|
|
Quote
| 1 user liked this post
|
07-05-2013, 04:36 PM
|
#36
|
Valued Poster
Join Date: Jan 16, 2010
Location: Texas
Posts: 51,038
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by CJ7
neither , you cant produce it
|
Of course, I can. I was trying to prove what an illiterate lazy ass you are .. and also let you crawl way out on that limb, before it gets cut off behind your lazy, ignorant ass ...
Technical Release No. 2013-02,
III. A.
"The FLSA section 18B requirement to provide a notice to employees of coverage options applies to employers to which the FLSA applies. In general, the FLSA applies to employers that employ one or more employees who are engaged in, or produce goods for, interstate commerce. For most firms, a test of not less than $500,000 in annual dollar volume of business applies."
Release No. 2013-02 is discussing notices from employers on your (notice the lack of an " ' " and the lack of an "e" on the end) "man's" fantastic, unimaginably thorough health insurance program for ANYONE who wants health insurance ... out of the 11 million who didn't have any (for which the plan was passed).
.. still trying to figure how to "disable" someone without killing them?
|
|
Quote
| 1 user liked this post
|
07-05-2013, 04:46 PM
|
#37
|
Valued Poster
Join Date: Feb 9, 2010
Location: Here
Posts: 14,191
|
to provide notice to employees
said company with 1-49 employees are still excluded from the mandate
|
|
Quote
| 1 user liked this post
|
07-05-2013, 04:57 PM
|
#38
|
Account Disabled
Join Date: Jun 19, 2011
Location: Dixie Land
Posts: 22,098
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by CJ7
to provide notice to employees
said company with 1-49 employees are still excluded from the mandate
|
God damn, you are dense.
|
|
Quote
| 1 user liked this post
|
07-06-2013, 06:57 AM
|
#39
|
Valued Poster
Join Date: Jan 16, 2010
Location: Texas
Posts: 51,038
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by IIFFOFRDB
God damn, you are dense.
|
I think it was ....
... just too tight a squeeze for too long with the "tongs" to extract him from "momma."
Or was she trying to push him back in when she realized what she had done.
He is a poster child for better firearms screening .. he actually as 53 of them!!!!
|
|
Quote
| 1 user liked this post
|
07-06-2013, 10:08 AM
|
#40
|
BANNED
Join Date: Feb 22, 2012
Location: -
Posts: 486
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by LexusLover
Of course, I can. I was trying to prove what an illiterate lazy ass you are .. and also let you crawl way out on that limb, before it gets cut off behind your lazy, ignorant ass ...
Technical Release No. 2013-02,
III. A.
"The FLSA section 18B requirement to provide a notice to employees of coverage options applies to employers to which the FLSA applies. In general, the FLSA applies to employers that employ one or more employees who are engaged in, or produce goods for, interstate commerce. For most firms, a test of not less than $500,000 in annual dollar volume of business applies."
Release No. 2013-02 is discussing notices from employers on your (notice the lack of an " ' " and the lack of an "e" on the end) "man's" fantastic, unimaginably thorough health insurance program for ANYONE who wants health insurance ... out of the 11 million who didn't have any (for which the plan was passed).
.. edit "STEAL" trying to figure how to "disable" someone without killing them?
|
SEND THE MONEY!
SEND ALL THE SPERM YOU COLLECTED!
|
|
Quote
| 1 user liked this post
|
07-06-2013, 12:16 PM
|
#41
|
Valued Poster
Join Date: Feb 9, 2010
Location: Here
Posts: 14,191
|
Businesses with 50 or more full-time employees or full-time equivalents face potential employer mandate penalties. In this context, a full-time employee is one who works 120 hours per month or more. In counting toward 50, each 120 hours per month of part-time labor comprises an FTE.
company revenue isn't part of the equation
if run a hedge fund, make $1000000 a year, and have an administrative assistant hired to answer the phone and open the mail, my bottom line doesn't push the number of employees over the 50 mark
|
|
Quote
| 1 user liked this post
|
07-06-2013, 12:33 PM
|
#42
|
Valued Poster
Join Date: Jan 16, 2010
Location: Texas
Posts: 51,038
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by CJ7
Businesses with 50 or more full-time employees or full-time equivalents face potential employer mandate penalties. In this context, a full-time employee is one who works 120 hours per month or more. ...
|
And where is the "fine print" for that bullshit ... related to the "Affordable Act"?
There are a couple of elements that distinguished the Act from previous Federal employee programs .. one is a revenue criteria for applicability as opposed to numbers of employees as had been the tradition and the other is the "fine/tax" or whatever each side wanted to call it (now a TAX by the SCOTUS)... A third process that is distinguished was the ability of "The Secretary" to promulgate regulations without jurisdiction in the courts to review an objection to the content and/or enforcement of the regulations.
I would have thought after 3 years anyone who wanted to talk about it would have read it.
Pretty sure you didn't read it before you thought it was a good idea .. hardly anyone else did.
|
|
Quote
| 1 user liked this post
|
07-06-2013, 01:00 PM
|
#43
|
Valued Poster
Join Date: Feb 9, 2010
Location: Here
Posts: 14,191
|
I would have thought after 3 years of bitching about it, asshats like you would be pretty happy about the government postponing fining businesses with 50 employees who refused to participate ..
you (apostrophe) re really confused aren't you ? .... most little bitches are.
|
|
Quote
| 2 users liked this post
|
07-06-2013, 03:57 PM
|
#44
|
Valued Poster
Join Date: Sep 30, 2011
Location: I can see FTW from here
Posts: 5,611
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by CJ7
Businesses with 50 or more full-time employees or full-time equivalents face potential employer mandate penalties. In this context, a full-time employee is one who works 120 hours per month or more. In counting toward 50, each 120 hours per month of part-time labor comprises an FTE.
company revenue isn't part of the equation
if run a hedge fund, make $1000000 a year, and have an administrative assistant hired to answer the phone and open the mail, my bottom line doesn't push the number of employees over the 50 mark
|
Employer to newest employee Bob on friday.
(Congratulations Bob you have become our 50th employee)
Employer to newest employee Bob on monday
(I'm sorry Bob but I'm afraid I have some bad news)
|
|
Quote
| 1 user liked this post
|
07-06-2013, 04:03 PM
|
#45
|
Valued Poster
Join Date: Jan 16, 2010
Location: Texas
Posts: 51,038
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by CJ7
.... most little bitches are.
|
Of all the little bitches around .. you certainly ought to know. I accept your expertise. Bitch.
Sounds to me like you need to hook up with some of the alleged Greek posters and relax a bit to take the edge of that frustration. Since you seem to want to divert attention from the OP topic.
|
|
Quote
| 1 user liked this post
|
|
AMPReviews.net |
Find Ladies |
Hot Women |
|