Seeking Alpha

Benefit costs have grown faster than wages and salaries for two years now, the Labor Department...

Benefit costs have grown faster than wages and salaries for two years now, the Labor Department reports, and it’s a troubling trend: “The more that companies have to spend on benefits, the less take-home pay goes to workers," WSJ's Kelly Evans writes. "This undermines the virtuous cycle of consumer spending and job growth needed to help lower the 9.1% unemployment rate.”
Comments (42)
  • Machiavelli999
    , contributor
    Comments (829) | Send Message
     
    Absolutely true! And isn't the proof for the "Obamacare is worsening this economy" argument??

     

    If you believe that Obamacare has increased the cost of insurance through its mandates and regulations (which I don't think there is any doubt. See Romneycare in MA and see what it did to the cost of health insurance) then you see that Obamacare is in effect increasing the cost of hiring people.

     

    And as always we return to simple supply & demand to explain what happens next. If price goes up and demand goes down. It's that simple.
    28 Oct 2011, 06:03 PM Reply Like
  • wolverine27
    , contributor
    Comments (412) | Send Message
     
    One simple fact you ignore.
    Obamacare hasn't been implemented yet. This talking point of rising costs because of obamacare is utter nonsense.
    As another inconvenient truth , health care costs have been rocketing up for the last 20 years .
    As for Ma....they love their plan . My cousin can't figure out why the country is so against it. Romney runs from the one thing he did get right.

     

    We will never get anywhere until we stop making up straw men arguments that we hear on tv.
    28 Oct 2011, 10:05 PM Reply Like
  • Wyatt Junker
    , contributor
    Comments (4503) | Send Message
     
    "Obamacare hasn't been implemented yet."

     

    Not the exchanges, but most HMOs have already responded to significant parts of the bill, most notably forced insurance to those with preexisting conditions as well as adults at 26 who can stay on mommy & daddy's plan. The HMOs were very vocal about their rate increases and said as much on their CCs, some rate hikes by as much as 30%!

     

    Sure we have had huge rate hikes for the last 12 years, but last year was a real doozy and the HMOs said they were reacting to the new law(no longer a bill).

     

    You might want to stop making up straw men arguments imported from Huffpo & Kos, kid.
    29 Oct 2011, 11:06 AM Reply Like
  • wolverine27
    , contributor
    Comments (412) | Send Message
     
    Sure we have had huge rate hikes for the last 12 years, but last year was a real doozy and the HMOs said they were reacting to the new law(no longer a bill).

     

    straw men ? your a lost idealogical wing-nut .read your own statement , it says it all. they have been raising rates forever ...they would raise rates no matter what .

     

    no idea why you call me kid unless your 70 and senile , which would explain alot.
    30 Oct 2011, 10:10 PM Reply Like
  • Machiavelli999
    , contributor
    Comments (829) | Send Message
     
    I think you are truly the lost one wolverine. I find it funny how liberals are quick to bash conservatives and accuse them of being anti-science and anti-academia, but when it comes to economics, they are just as quick to scoff at the accumulated knowledge. And it's for the same reason: they don't like what the academics have to say.

     

    But anyway, let's just walk through this. First of all, I can already see your lack of economic knowledge when you seem to imply that insurance companies can raise rates with impunity. They raise premiums for the same reason any insurance company raises premiums: the risk they are covering has increased.

     

    This is the case with auto, life, fire, body part, ANY insurance. (And by the way, those rates have not gone up with impunity like health insurance rates) The premiums are determined by actuaries who take into consideration the risk that there will be a claim on the policy and the potential payout that will have to go with said claim. In that case, it is pretty obvious that earthquake insurance for a house in California will be much higher than for the same insurance in Florida. And vice versa for Hurricane & Flood insurance.

     

    Now of course the other layer in the premium is the profit the insurance company makes which varies depending on how much competition the company is exposed to. With little competition, the insurance company is free to add on a significant chunk for profit, with lots of competition profit margins are thin.

     

    So, that's really all that goes into the price of an insurance policy. If the premiums keep rising, one of those three factors must be changing in an adverse way. We can rule out the competition angle. Although competition is limited because of the high barrier to entry into the market because of all the crazy regulatory rules, this hasn't gotten much worse in recent years.

     

    So, basically it comes down to the fact that the cost of the healthcare insurance companies must cover is increasing. That's why blaming the insurance companies is so stupid. They are just a thermometer telling you its getting hotter outside and you are getting mad at the thermometer.

     

    The reasons for why care has gotten more expensive is long and varied. Some of the most important ones are: new technologies have been developed which has meant more available care options that insurance companies must cover due to state mandates. Whereas before someone with a complex disease would be put into hospice care until he or she passes away, now they have a wide array of options to treat their disease. All of which costs money. All of which the insurance company must pay for. And obviously all of which goes into the actuary calculations that I mentioned before when they determine premium amounts.

     

    Another, rarely spoken about reason is that the AMA has setup a tightly controlled cartel in which they severely limit the amount of people allowed into the medical profession and so keep the supply of doctors much lower than is needed. A shortage of doctors means that the people who are doctors command very high salaries, which also get passed on to the consumer of medical care. The AMA also imposes rules, enforced by the state, that do not allow nurse practitioners to do the same thing licensed doctors do for a lot less cost.

     

    So, basically it is a very simply story wolverine. The cost of healthcare has increased. The amount of payouts to insurance policy holders has also increased. Not surprisingly AT ALL, the premiums have increased. Be mad at your government and the state-sponsored cartel run by the AMA. Not the insurance companies.
    31 Oct 2011, 02:27 AM Reply Like
  • Wyatt Junker
    , contributor
    Comments (4503) | Send Message
     
    "no idea why you call me kid"

     

    Because you have the typical worldview of a child.
    31 Oct 2011, 12:32 PM Reply Like
  • wolverine27
    , contributor
    Comments (412) | Send Message
     
    your either the most naive person on the planet or you work for an insurance company .
    insurance companies raise rates because they have no competition .its called price fixing .
    the country has been divided up for each company to have his share of the pie. this is why you only see 1 company with 90-95 percent of the business in certain states . the other carriers deliberately price themselves out . to believe that there is no collusion is to be devoid of reality .
    insurance companies are the problem not the solution.
    31 Oct 2011, 10:45 PM Reply Like
  • wolverine27
    , contributor
    Comments (412) | Send Message
     
    if you could step out of your trailer long enough to see what exists in the world maybe you too can be enlightened.
    31 Oct 2011, 10:46 PM Reply Like
  • Wyatt Junker
    , contributor
    Comments (4503) | Send Message
     
    Oh that's right. You're enlightened.

     

    I'm sorry. I didn't mean a child.

     

    I meant a teenager.
    31 Oct 2011, 10:50 PM Reply Like
  • Machiavelli999
    , contributor
    Comments (829) | Send Message
     
    When crazy conservatives like Michelle Bachmann make wild accusations without any proof except anecdotal evidence that autism vaccines cause mental disease, they are rightly called bat shit insane.

     

    When crazy liberals make similar baseless accusations about evil big oil or big health or big bubblegum, well...they are just part of the 99%..

     

    Explain to me this wolverine. Why have they not colluded on auto, life, fire, earthquake, flood, etc. insurance? Why is it only health? The one thing that is the most politically charged. Are they that stupid?

     

    My god, I don't even think Krugman would accuse them of something this dumb.

     

    You are right about the fact that one insurance company holds a huge portion of the market. But like most liberals, you attack the symptoms, not the disease. The disease to a monopoly is usually a very high barrier of entry into a market. Sometimes it is because of natural reasons. A certain scale is needed to be an oil conglomerate. You cannot be a small start up when launching billion dollar exploration projects.

     

    But for insurance, no level of scale is really necessary. On the contrary, for auto, fire, life, etc. insurance the options are endless because scale is not necessary and the returns are great. (Most insurance companies actually don't make their money off of premiums. The money collected off of premiums is used for investment pools. That's where the real money is made).

     

    But try and start a health insurance company. If you managed to crawl through the endless maze of regulations and actually startup, the moment you write your first policy, you better have an army of lawyers ready to defend yourself. A huge level of scale is needed to be in the health insurance industry because of the high barrier of entry into the market. But unfortunately that high barrier of entry is not natural and is built entirely by the state in their efforts to "protect" their citizenry.
    1 Nov 2011, 02:12 AM Reply Like
  • JohnBinTN
    , contributor
    Comments (3621) | Send Message
     
    Mach-

     

    Auto (to some extent) and homeowner's (in a BIG way) have went crazy with the rate increases. This is just from me (a small sampling, granted), but we bought our house 10/2007 and our homeowner's policy was $456.00 (Allstate) for one year. Last year we switched because the very best rate we could find was $709.00 for one year (Safeco - pretty generic, right?) Well, we got our renewal last month and they were raising it to $880.00 for one year (a 24-ish% increase). The best we could find this year (and I shopped EVERY insurance company) was $809.00 for one year coverage (State Farm - Discount Double-Check, etc.).

     

    Our HO's insurance has almost doubled in 4 years. And we've had no claims! WTF?!

     

    If State Farm boondoggles us with this teaser rate this year, we'll just have to start from scratch and see who wants our money the most. Not many options left.
    2 Nov 2011, 07:24 PM Reply Like
  • wyostocks
    , contributor
    Comments (7702) | Send Message
     
    It is also the cost to employers of state unemployment insurance which has skyrocket for the companies.
    28 Oct 2011, 06:06 PM Reply Like
  • Machiavelli999
    , contributor
    Comments (829) | Send Message
     
    This is really the untold story of this recession. No Obama did not cause the crash, but he is making it worse by increasing the cost of hiring people.

     

    The increased cost of UI, the increased cost of health care benefits and what else is forgotten is that the minimmum wage was raised significantly in 2009. In the middle of the worst recession in 70 years!!

     

    So, it really is simple supply & demand. When you artificially introduce a price support for something, you will get overages. In the case of labor, overage is also known as unemployment.

     

    People often complain to me that they are not getting raises at work. I tell them that they are. They are getting big raises. Their employer is paying a lot more each year for their benefits and their UI. They don't really understand that.
    28 Oct 2011, 06:14 PM Reply Like
  • wolverine27
    , contributor
    Comments (412) | Send Message
     
    More nonsense . Do you ever think before you talk.

     

    Minimum wage is the problem ?
    People are getting raises by the employer paying more for benefits?

     

    The increase in health care costs are passed on to the employee in 90 percent of the cases ( labor statistics ) employers rarely eat the cost ....its the perfect , I can't afford it anymore argument.

     

    I have no idea what planet you live on .
    28 Oct 2011, 10:11 PM Reply Like
  • Wyatt Junker
    , contributor
    Comments (4503) | Send Message
     
    Min wage hikes are a significant problem which contribute to higher unemployment. What planet to you live on?

     

    It takes awhile before a business is able to compensate for the increase in the cost of business due to mandated MW hikes since inflation is not immediate. What a business does is slowly raise prices to offset the new cost increase, but not enough to NOT eat into their margins so they begin to cost cut(ie terminate workers or freeze out new hires) until inflation hits every other place within the economy. In addition, an immediate cap is placed on raises.

     

    Its unbelievable, not so much your ignorance. Its pretty common. But the fact that we have almost 14% national unemployment and several states just last month raised their min wages.

     

    The retard strength of our politicians is severe. And for those who vote for them, even stronger.
    29 Oct 2011, 11:12 AM Reply Like
  • Wyatt Junker
    , contributor
    Comments (4503) | Send Message
     
    Min wage is a political reacharound from the labor unions who in turn pay off their representatives who in turn artificially work against natural market rates(supply & demand) and cause havoc within the economy. It is an ego machine, a prop for vote buying making the slimeballs and glorywhores at the state level and in DC look like pimps, and turns their constituencies into prostitutes. In the end it accomplishes very little beyond inflation. Those businesses that can't raise their prices simply go out of business. The ones that can survive only do so once they raise their prices on consumers.

     

    Min. wage robs from savers and the elderly in the end.
    29 Oct 2011, 11:16 AM Reply Like
  • Poor Texan
    , contributor
    Comments (3529) | Send Message
     
    "The retard strength of our politicians is severe. And for those who vote for them, even stronger."

     

    But Wyatt, their intentions are good:-(
    29 Oct 2011, 02:07 PM Reply Like
  • ColdLogic
    , contributor
    Comments (81) | Send Message
     
    You are absolutely clueless, wolverine. Minimum wage, in other words, FORBIDS a person from trading their labor for a wage lower than it. Who would give a bum with a drinking problem and high potential liability a job at the minimum wage rate, when there are plentiful clean-cut teenagers? Answer: nobody. Who would hire a person with Down's syndrome to bag groceries when someone else can not only bag them but do other tasks as well? Answer: nobody.

     

    Do you see the idea here, that minimum wage pretends that everything is ideal, that employers have no options when it comes to employing people. The actual effect is high unemployment among those who have low-skills. This group of people will forever be dependent on handouts... and more likely to vote for the very politicians who put them in this mess, the pro-minimum-wage ones. They're being stolen from by a hand belonging to the same political body who puts a few bucks in their pocket.

     

    In a fair system, a person could trade their labor for any wage, develop respect, some skills, and save up and apply for a better job elsewhere. Minimum wage absolutely forbids this from happening for those who aren't allowed to initiate the very 1st step.

     

    "The increase in health care costs are passed on to the employee in 90 percent of the cases ( labor statistics ) employers rarely eat the cost"

     

    Assume this is true, this increases the cost of employing people, meaning they just increase the job responsibilities of existing employees since new hiring has the added cost of health care payment. You think you can get a free lunch, that human beings don't respond to incentives/disincentives. It's the fallacy of every statist, the idea that productive human beings just nod their head and do whatever those in authority tell them to do. If it weren't so damaging to our nation's future, we could just laugh at it.
    29 Oct 2011, 04:52 PM Reply Like
  • Wyatt Junker
    , contributor
    Comments (4503) | Send Message
     
    You would have thought that we would have learned the lesson of artificial wage & price controls long ago. Apparently this lesson must be learned for every generation born. Sad.

     

    As an employer I see it firsthand. I WOULD LOVE to be able to PAY my people MORE! But min wage doesn't allow me to.

     

    How is that possible you ask? Simple. The good workers are being robbed of higher salary from the mediocre as well as the newhires. And if I want to grow as a business I have to add on more newhires. This comes directly out of the pockets of the old hires. The newhires therefore COMPETE for ever higher wages with the old hires. The old hires put in their work, paid their dues, were loyal, learned the systems. Now they are being robbed from by the newhires who don't have a damn clue about W in TF is going on. The govt. tells me I have to pay them a higher wage. It robs the better skilled worker.

     

    The state is BY FORCE telling an employer what they can and cannot do. Try to not pay min wage. Go ahead. Try it. See what happens when an employee reports you to the labor board. Min wage is not 'a suggestion' It is backed up by force. Oh first, they'll fine you as a business owner. But if you don't pay the fine, what then? They put a lien on you, and indebt you, ultimately confiscating your assets. Okay, fine. Don't cough them up. See what happens. Pretty soon you get the goons showing up in a black SUV and the guys in mirrored glasses get out. A local sheriff also pulls up with the landlord, a locksmith to rekey the property, a summons and an indictment. All of them armed.

     

    This is the end game. Nothing the state does is 'a suggestion'. It is always brute force by thugs.

     

    Min wage is not some idea. It is a union originated fabrication to set a negotiated price floor for further negotiations with contracted labor. They always refer to whatever the min wage is as their floor then use it to gauge off in their talks to up the ante. The politicians of course are a part of the process in this game of graft. They get kickbacks from the unions. Meanwhile the small businesses suffer the most and the elderly as well as the savers as it is just one more catalyst for inflation once the adjustments are made. IOW, it is a giant charade, a dollar destroyer and a political/labor/msm shenanigan.
    29 Oct 2011, 05:56 PM Reply Like
  • Wyatt Junker
    , contributor
    Comments (4503) | Send Message
     
    What I've been doing to offset increases in min wage(along with price inflation) is to cut employee benefits. Its subtle. But its what has been going on with healthcare for the last 15 years also. Higher co-pays, less benefit, higher premiums. Not a great trend. And here neither do I have a choice. I reduce the number of PTO days, make it a longer process to earn it and raise the hours worked per week for those who become 'full time'.

     

    Don't thank me. Thank a politician.

     

    They're robbing you.
    29 Oct 2011, 05:59 PM Reply Like
  • wolverine27
    , contributor
    Comments (412) | Send Message
     
    do you even know what the minimum wage is ?

     

    amazing how you idealogical wing nuts just keep blaming the abused .
    keep coddling corporate america, that trickle thing will coming down your leg any day now.
    31 Oct 2011, 10:50 PM Reply Like
  • Poor Texan
    , contributor
    Comments (3529) | Send Message
     
    "People often complain to me that they are not getting raises at work. I tell them that they are. They are getting big raises. Their employer is paying a lot more each year for their benefits and their UI. They don't really understand that."

     

    Bingo! The employee sees his paycheck. The employer sees the total employee cost. I was working temp and took a 30% cut to get on the payroll. Guess what! After figuring in the value of the employer paid benefits, I got a raise.
    28 Oct 2011, 06:41 PM Reply Like
  • Wyatt Junker
    , contributor
    Comments (4503) | Send Message
     
    Obamacare made the cost of health insurance I pay for all 125 of my employees SKYROCKET this last year!

     

    And the UI kicker for the last two years has been hideous as my pool acct. percentage has risen also.

     

    But the MSM has his back so there's nothing to see here.

     

    Hope and change.
    28 Oct 2011, 06:50 PM Reply Like
  • wolverine27
    , contributor
    Comments (412) | Send Message
     
    Obamacare is not in force yet .....how can it affect your costs ?
    28 Oct 2011, 10:13 PM Reply Like
  • JohnBinTN
    , contributor
    Comments (3621) | Send Message
     
    Raise costs on the rumor, raise costs on the news.
    28 Oct 2011, 10:18 PM Reply Like
  • kcr357
    , contributor
    Comments (557) | Send Message
     
    Several things are already in effect for insurance co's regarding excluding people and dropping pre-ex. conds.(mainly they can no longer do either). Don't worry about the insurance co's. though, they'll just pass the costs onto the consumer and employers.
    28 Oct 2011, 11:27 PM Reply Like
  • Wyatt Junker
    , contributor
    Comments (4503) | Send Message
     
    Read above. Already responded.

     

    Trust me. I know. I pay the bills for my company. Obamacare directly caused premium rate hikes to double from their usual annual bumps. I expect them to rise even more after it is implemented. It is a full on disaster.

     

    This is the intent however. Obama wants the private insurers to die off. The more premiums rise, the quicker employers like me will dump their employees all into the state mandate exchanges. So, single payer didn't make it into law? So what? Doesn't matter once the price hikes are so severe no employer can afford private. See how that works?

     

    Then the boot of the State forces everyone into DMV care. Right out of central command 101, Soviet style planning. This is just the beginning. The hell to be unleashed will be astonishing once this gets going. Don't worry, Obama won't be around anymore to take the blame then. He will be long gone. It will be someone else's problem. The fact that doctor depletion rates will skyrocket since none of them want to be public utilities and wouldn't be able to garner a salary worth the risk while waiting rooms pile up. Yeah, nothing to see here, right kid?

     

    Medicaid and especially medicare were just the precursors. They've been huge disasters on their own, driving up healthcare premiums beyond any true natural supply/demand ever could. State intervention and forced coverage through these LBJ disasters has caused not only prices to rise but doctor/patient relationships to suffer. They are no longer 'patients'. They are numbers. You think its bad now? heh Wait till you get what you screamed for, kid.
    29 Oct 2011, 11:25 AM Reply Like
  • jstratt
    , contributor
    Comments (2281) | Send Message
     
    Dont expect any end in sight to medical benefit increases. Given the money contributed to politicians Health care is sure to continue to rise at a rate 2 times inflation.

     

    I do think that longer term this will change. Everyone is beginning to understand the political payoff system. Further, signs of mobilization with Occupy movements are beginning to occur.

     

    I am not supporting or advocating Occupy demonstrations. Just recognizing that frustrations will continue to boil up and that these are likely seeds of change.
    28 Oct 2011, 07:32 PM Reply Like
  • Poor Texan
    , contributor
    Comments (3529) | Send Message
     
    "I am not supporting or advocating Occupy demonstrations. Just recognizing that frustrations will continue to boil up and that these are likely seeds of change."

     

    Not so sure of that. While the frustration is real, I don't hear any solutions other than over throw something or other. The Tea Party was/is more focused, pushing for a balanced budget as the solution to runaway debt and future(?) stagflation. I remember the early nineties where we went to the airport to greet:-) a delegation of city officials with a protest against a local issue they were pushing. Some guy got off the airplane and joined in our protest just for the fun of it. If that's the extent of commitment of some of the OWS crowd, I believe it will fade fairly quickly. I mean, if Chicago cracked down of the occupy crowd, where can they turn.
    28 Oct 2011, 08:35 PM Reply Like
  • Hendershott
    , contributor
    Comments (1510) | Send Message
     
    So why do employers want to be in the healthcare business anyway? Why not just hand it over to a single payer system? What do you care if it's crappy socialized medicine? The Canadians seem to like theirs and last I heard Canadian companies had an advantage in that they don't have to pay for health insurance. So it's crappy health care. So what? If you can afford it you will still be able to get whatever you want. Minimum wage. $7.25 and hour. $290 a week. $1,256 a month, $15,080 a year. Someone is supposed to live on that? How many products can you sell to someone making $1,256 a month? Why don't we just bring back child labor? It was cheaper.
    30 Oct 2011, 02:28 PM Reply Like
  • Wyatt Junker
    , contributor
    Comments (4503) | Send Message
     
    Child labor has been a boon to the fourth world, helps them make it to the third. And if there's not a third, there will never be a second. Call it the evolution of societies. Let's not be a dirty american and pretend we know better, shall we?
    30 Oct 2011, 04:11 PM Reply Like
  • wyostocks
    , contributor
    Comments (7702) | Send Message
     
    Stop the crap.
    Minimum wage is supposed to be for entry level jobs.
    If one in an entry level job never progresses beyond the skill level of that job, then it is the persons fault not the employer, not the taxpayer, not the government.
    As concerns Canadian medical, if you ever knew any Canadians who had serious health problems, guess where they had the operation, NOT IN CANADA.
    Get real in your comments.
    30 Oct 2011, 04:28 PM Reply Like
  • JohnBinTN
    , contributor
    Comments (3621) | Send Message
     
    Good point, Wyo. LONG ago when I entered the auto parts field, I was a minimum wage counter guy. 5 years later I was the general manager of my own store. I imagine had life circumstances been different, I could have continued to climb the ladder, too.

     

    People all too often forget that you have to start "somewhere", typically at the bottom. But you don't necessarily have to stay there.
    30 Oct 2011, 05:16 PM Reply Like
  • Hendershott
    , contributor
    Comments (1510) | Send Message
     
    As an employer, why do you care about the quality of the healthcare? It's the cost to the employer you should be concerned about isn't it? (Actually I do know a couple of Canadians who have had serious problems. Not being wealthy, they went through the Canadian system and weren't all that unhappy about it. They both were glad they weren't driven into bankruptcy by medical bills.) I'm not defending the Canadian health care system. My question is, as an employer, why should non healthcare American businesses be in the healthcare business?
    30 Oct 2011, 06:16 PM Reply Like
  • wyostocks
    , contributor
    Comments (7702) | Send Message
     
    You may find this hard to believe, but most employers really do care about the welfare of their employees, the good ones anyway.
    Keeping GOOD employees is a must for companies to prosper.
    30 Oct 2011, 07:54 PM Reply Like
  • Poor Texan
    , contributor
    Comments (3529) | Send Message
     
    "As an employer, why do you care about the quality of the healthcare?"

     

    Because sick employees are unproductive.

     

    Besides that, they are fellow human beings who, in most parts of this country, live down the street, have their kids in school with yours, travel in the same social circles and in many other ways make the community a worthwhile place.
    30 Oct 2011, 08:56 PM Reply Like
  • Hendershott
    , contributor
    Comments (1510) | Send Message
     
    What, an outbreak of ethics in business? Next thing you'll want to pay them a living wage.
    30 Oct 2011, 10:09 PM Reply Like
  • Wyatt Junker
    , contributor
    Comments (4503) | Send Message
     
    I'd pay them much more than a living wage if government would simply get out of the way. My compliance costs alone have skyrocketed due to increasingly pernicious regulation. The more I have to pay to deal with this, the less I can compensate or reward honest, loyal employees.
    31 Oct 2011, 12:31 PM Reply Like
  • wolverine27
    , contributor
    Comments (412) | Send Message
     
    i think your full of it .
    your compliance costs have skyrocketed ? really ? your using this as an excuse for not paying your so called honest employees ?

     

    i dont think you even have a job .

     

    your a single , self proclaimed intellectual who is so hung up on your hatred for the so called left that you have turned into a tool.
    you forget that democrats , fight in wars , pay taxes and are AMERICANS first.
    2 Nov 2011, 11:44 PM Reply Like
  • Wyatt Junker
    , contributor
    Comments (4503) | Send Message
     
    "you forget that democrats , fight in wars , pay taxes and are AMERICANS first"

     

    Democrats are the rotting afterbirth of the 60's longhairs, child. 'Fighting in wars'? Try the inventors of draft dodging. They are not net taxpayers. They are net tax drawers. They are on the take as a whole. Americans first? Try ashamed of America first.

     

    You don't know what you're talking about, kid, as usual. I'm not surprised.

     

    You bore me. Go away.
    2 Nov 2011, 11:51 PM Reply Like
  • wolverine27
    , contributor
    Comments (412) | Send Message
     
    your an old angry tea-bagger .

     

    you should be very careful with your words , some day they might get you into trouble.

     

    the 1960s are not coming back....
    2 Nov 2011, 11:55 PM Reply Like
  • Wyatt Junker
    , contributor
    Comments (4503) | Send Message
     
    "you should be very careful with your words , some day they might get you into trouble."

     

    Oh noe. U tryin to scareey me Kim Jong ill?

     

    "the 1960s are not coming back"

     

    Lady Gaga is Britney Spears who is Madonna who is Marsha Brady... for every new iteration, another vial of penicillin. Nothing changes. Nothing is ever new. All has already been seen.

     

    Fellow travelers, gypsies, the French bohemme, the nouveau, drifters, beats, dandys, slackers(circe late 90s), SDI recipients, democrats, skum, marxists and losers ... they've been with us forever. They are just recycled here again in huddled reruns ever since their prophet Jerry died and Phish disbanded and find themselves reassembled like a freshly shuffled deck of cards.
    3 Nov 2011, 12:44 AM Reply Like
DJIA (DIA) S&P 500 (SPY)
ETF Tools
Find the right ETFs for your portfolio:
Seeking Alpha's new ETF Hub
ETF Investment Guide:
Table of Contents | One Page Summary
Read about different ETF Asset Classes:
ETF Selector

Next headline on your portfolio:

|