Example of Supermans' "Workers Paradise"

[Nathans_Dad]

Moneyguy:

Exactly. It seems as though Rodeo wants to keep the system as is in order to prevent someone from being unfairly ruled against while Len (and I for that matter) think the current system puts an undue burden on all of us and is rife with corruption and fraud.

The real issue becomes what is a work related disability? At what point should the employer pay?

Obviously things like silicosis in mines should be covered. But what about other things (like the arthritis in this example)? Silicosis is caused pretty much by one thing and one thing only, chronic exposure to silica dust. Arthritis can be caused by a multitude of factors, including heredity. It is not solely a function of the job you do.

Examples abound. What if a fair skinned person decided to become a life long lifeguard? Should their skin cancer be covered from sun exposure? What if someone worked in McDonald's their whole life and ate the food for lunch each day? Should their heart disease be covered?

At some point common sense has to intrude on the conversation and some lines must be drawn. I don't know how to fix the system, but it's pretty obvious that the system is currently broken. The status quo is not the answer.

[lendaddy]

Originally posted by Rodeo
I would no more ask the public to pay for my broken employees than I would my broken machinery, or my broken windows. Its not MY FAULT the machine broke, why should I pay for it? Let's let daddy and the rest of the pubic pay. I did "nothing wrong," the machine just broke.

Bull. I'm responsible for my costs of production, not the taxpayers. And that inculdes things that go wrong, whether mechanical or human.

I OWN the machine, I do NOT own the people. If you don't see the difference I can't help you.

[Nathans_Dad]

Originally posted by Rodeo
I would no more ask the public to pay for my broken employees than I would my broken machinery, or my broken windows. Its not MY FAULT the machine broke, why should I pay for it? Let's let daddy and the rest of the pubic pay. I did "nothing wrong," the machine just broke.

Bull. I'm responsible for my costs of production, not the taxpayers. And that inculdes things that go wrong, whether mechanical or human.

Now that's just an ignorant statement. OF COURSE you ask the public to pay for your broken employees!!

Do you take the cost of their disability insurance out of your own pocket? Of course not. That cost goes into your overhead. That overhead determines the pricing of whatever it is that you do or make. That cost is passed on to the consumer. So YES, we all pay for your disability insurance.

That's the same flawed logic that thinks that raising the minimum wage does anything in the real world. Sure the folks making minimum wage feel good for a while, until the price of bread and milk and gas and everything else goes up and then their dollar doesn't buy as much anymore.

[Rodeo]

Absolutely not Rick. You need to understand the difference between "the public" and "my customers." My customers pay for my broken machines, "the public" does not.

When "my customers" pay in the form of increased ovverhead, that is a cost everyone can calculate. And you can chose not to buy, or to buy from someone else. When "the public" pays via taxes, the cost get hidden, and people that never bought a product from me pay.

[CRH911S]

lendaddy, just started reading this and I have a comment regarding something you said on the first page. Your comment, "And I don't believe we are allowed to ask about pre-existing medical conditions. That would be discrimination." On this you are correct. However, you can describe the primary and secondary duties and then ask if there are any physical or mental conditions that would affect a pre-existing condition and/or is there any reason why you couldn't perform these primary and secondary tasks. The timing is important here. What you do before an offer of employment is made is different from once an offer is made and accepted. Have you considered employment physicals prior to making a job offer?

[Rodeo]

And here's the best part of daddy's "public pays" system. If you are an irresponsible manufacturer and your plant operations result in $10MM/year in medical costs, you can price your product EXACTLY THE SAME as the plant across the street, where due to stringent safety guidelines and updated machinery, they incur only $3MM/year in injuries, making the same product.

Viola! you just saved $7MM/year and lost no competitive advantage! Indeed, the guy across the street will probably price higher than you because he spends money on safety measures and you don't!

Yacht time baby! (on the taxpayers' backs of course).

[tobster1911]

Originally posted by Rodeo
Absolutely not Rick. You need to understand the difference between "the public" and "my customers." My customers pay for my broken machines, "the public" does not.

When "my customers" pay in the form of increased ovverhead, that is a cost everyone can calculate. And you can chose not to buy, or to buy from someone else. When "the public" pays via taxes, the cost get hidden, and people that never bought a product from me pay.

So you are saying that Len should suck up the cost and pass it on by raising the prices of his end product? The people who buy his product should pay for this employee's choices? Like I said before, you only care about passing the buck......

[lendaddy]

Originally posted by Rodeo
And here's the best part of daddy's "public pays" system. If you are an irresponsible manufacturer and your plant operations result in $10MM/year in medical costs, you can price your product EXACTLY THE SAME as the plant across the street, where due to stringent safety guidelines and updated machinery, they incur only $3MM/year in injuries, making the same product.

Viola! you just saved $7MM/year and lost no competitive advantage! Indeed, the guy across the street will probably price higher than you because he spends money on safety measures and you don't!

Yacht time baby! (on the taxpayers' backs of course).

No good buddy, this would be an easily provable case of employer negligence. Are you even reading my posts?

[lendaddy]

Originally posted by CRH911S
lendaddy, just started reading this and I have a comment regarding something you said on the first page. Your comment, "And I don't believe we are allowed to ask about pre-existing medical conditions. That would be discrimination." On this you are correct. However, you can describe the primary and secondary duties and then ask if there are any physical or mental conditions that would affect a pre-existing condition and/or is there any reason why you couldn't perform these primary and secondary tasks. The timing is important here. What you do before an offer of employment is made is different from once an offer is made and accepted. Have you considered employment physicals prior to making a job offer?

This is a good point and something I will discuss with my rep.

[tobster1911]

Originally posted by Rodeo
Why do "conservatives" see "responsibility" only in one direction?

I found where Rodeo got lost. He can not comprehend that Len has stated numerous times that, "IF IT WAS HIS COMPANIES FAULT HE WOULD TAKE RESPONSIBILITY". Len simply asks that if he is not at fault, the other party take responsibility.

[CRH911S]

Rodeo isn't lost. What's missing here is the understanding that worker's comp is as holy as social security. And, it's not going away anytime soon!

[Rodeo]

Originally posted by lendaddy
No good buddy, this would be an easily provable case of employer negligence. Are you even reading my posts?

Prove it then, how is the employer negligent in my example? I said nothing about negligence. I said his plant had $10MM/year in injuries and a similar plant had $3MM.

Where's the negligence?

[Rodeo]

Originally posted by tobster1911
So you are saying that Len should suck up the cost and pass it on by raising the prices of his end product? The people who buy his product should pay for this employee's choices? Like I said before, you only care about passing the buck......

Pretty funny for a guy advocating taxpayer funding of workplace injuries accusing me of "passing the buck."

I want daddy to pass along the cost of production of his products to his customers, and not the taxpayers.

You can get yourself pretty twisted around can't you?

[Nathans_Dad]

Rodeo you want to make it just a burden on Len's customers but that usually isn't the case, is it?

An Example:

Len makes metal widgets.

Len gets the metal from a refiner (who has to pay worker's comp) who gets his raw ore from a miner (who has to pay worker's comp). Len makes the metal into widgets (Len pays workers comp) and then ships the widgets (shipper has to pay workers comp) to a retailer who sells them (the retailer has to pay workers comp).

So in reality a product has 5-6 layers of workers comp already built into the price that the consumer pays. Now if the widget is something highly specialized, then your scenario is correct.

What if the widget is, say, bread? What if the widget is water? What if it is a part to an automobile? How many things do you buy that are made of metal? Plastic? Glass? All these things are made in factories with workers who might get injured.

Therefore everyone pays for workers comp. If you want to take Len as a single entity then your argument holds, but last I checked workers comp was required by law across all businesses.