Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 30 of 50

Thread: Google to Pay Homosexual Employees More than Heterosexual Employees

  1. #1

    Google to Pay Homosexual Employees More than Heterosexual Employees

    http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2010/jul/10070504.html

    July 5, 2010 (LifeSiteNews.com) - A news release from Google says that the mega-search engine company will begin paying its homosexual employees more than their heterosexual counterparts.

    Citing a tax law that says health insurance benefits paid to civil partners of homosexual employees are considered taxable income, while benefits provided to married spouses are not taxed, Google announced it will rectify the tax "discrimination" against homosexuals by paying them the difference.

    On average an extra $1,069 per year will be given to homosexuals, according to a NY Times report.



  2. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  3. #2
    I think thats actually pretty cool. Even better would be to end tax discrimination all together by giving everyone a flat tax of 0.

  4. #3
    Quote Originally Posted by JamesButabi View Post
    I think thats actually pretty cool. Even better would be to end tax discrimination all together by giving everyone a flat tax of 0.
    And we have a winner! by post #2 no less.

  5. #4
    Nice!
    Capitalists can exploit you only with your permission: by trading with you, selling to you, asking you to sell out.

    Government exploits you at the point of a gun.

    As long as you limit the power of the latter, the former can only exploit by providing better products, services and options. if they collude, then all bets are off. But that is a problem with government--in that case fascism--not capitalism.

    -dew

  6. #5

  7. #6
    Quote Originally Posted by specsaregood View Post
    And we have a winner! by post #2 no less.
    Yes, but I expect that to be short-lived as the title draws in... other types

    At least the employer's seeking to be fair to its employees. Too many leave lop-sided policies in place regardless of what happens.
    Genuine, willful, aggressive ignorance is the one sure way to tick me off. I wish I could say you were trolling. I know better, and it's just sad.

  8. #7
    Quote Originally Posted by MelissaWV View Post
    Yes, but I expect that to be short-lived as the title draws in... other types
    Yes, well the title is one of those inflammatory, somewhat misleading lead-ins that we all hate so much in the media. I would have titled it: private employer makes pay changes to counteract discriminatory taxation system. But that's just me.

  9. #8
    Lol. Who would want "equal" status.

    Higher taxes on marriage and family. The “marriage penalty” (narrower tax brackets for married couples) will return from the first dollar of income. The child tax credit will be cut in half from $1000 to $500 per child. The standard deduction will no longer be doubled for married couples relative to the single level. The dependent care and adoption tax credits will be cut.
    Read more: http://www.atr.org/sixmonths.html?co...#ixzz0sqvr4wO8



  10. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  11. #9
    If I were single and worked for Google, I might "come out" to my boss. That girl he saw me with? My sister.

  12. #10
    Google is bribing people to turn gay, and someone needs to stop them...probably Theo.
    Donald Trump > SJW ass-tears

  13. #11
    Melissa, your signature is a good reminder that there are wackos at RPF. When debating issues here, it's good to remember that a stupid or certifiably insane person might be behind the other keyboard.

    As for the quote

    There are some sins ... worthy of death. Homosexuality is one such sin
    the expression that comes to mind is that maybe Theo "protests too much". I bet that when he is at church, there are times he doesn't completely close his eyes while praying. He can't help but keep them open, fixated by a man's bottocks in front of him.
    Last edited by low preference guy; 07-05-2010 at 05:27 PM.

  14. #12
    Quote Originally Posted by Petar View Post
    Google is bribing people to turn gay, and someone needs to stop them...probably Theo.
    Bibleman can stop them!


  15. #13
    Quote Originally Posted by Petar View Post
    Google is bribing people to turn gay, and someone needs to stop them...probably Theo.
    I envision theo riding a chariot up to the google building, pounding on the front door with his fist in fury, and summoning the wrath of Yahweh upon the Google heathens.
    Quote Originally Posted by Torchbearer
    what works can never be discussed online. there is only one language the government understands, and until the people start speaking it by the magazine full... things will remain the same.
    Hear/buy my music here "government is the enemy of liberty"-RP Support me on Patreon here Ephesians 6:12

  16. #14
    this should work out great for the metro sexuals!!!!

  17. #15
    Here's my problem with these sorts of measures. There might be an argument that government tax/company benefit systems favour married, heterosexual couples & their children, but by taking such steps, is Google not systematically discriminating against every single (as in, not married) employee in the organization? sevin alludes to this somewhat sarcastically further up in this post.

    I say this with a great deal of sincerity but also to play devil's advocate here. The original justification for tax/benefit extensions to the other spouse was that the wife/husband (usually wife back in the day...) of the employee was the homemaker who had an equally important responsibility to properly nurture/raise the children, care for the home and handle the bills. I fully realize that a great deal of this justification went out with double-income families during the mid-20th century, but are there really that many gay men out there who aren't able to afford hospital insurance because they can't access benefits from their live-in boyfriend? Is it not more so these days that Steve and Jake both have separate careers? And even if I am mistaken in these first couple of questions, would this not essentially be companies/the government punishing citizens for remaining single -- a lifestyle choice more universally accepted by the population and hence a more obvious area we should be addressing?

  18. #16
    Am I the only problem who see's nothing wrong with this if it is a private companies decision and not something forced by the government?
    "Resolve to serve no more, and you are at once freed. I do not ask that you place hands upon the tyrant to topple him over, but simply that you support him no longer; then you will behold him, like a great Colossus whose pedestal has been pulled away, fall of his own weight and break in pieces."-Étienne de La Boétie



  19. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  20. #17
    Quote Originally Posted by Vessol View Post
    Am I the only problem who see's nothing wrong with this if it is a private companies decision and not something forced by the government?
    No. I don't have a problem with it.

  21. #18
    Just as a point of clarification, I agree that private enterprises should be allowed to set up their benefits as they see fit, but as the recent scandal with Rand Paul showed, people are very selective on what sort of discrimination is permissible, and I still see Google's actions as discrimination!

  22. #19
    And for those that didn't parse it correctly. They aren't paying them more, they are simply reimbursing them for taxes they have to pay on health insurance benefits paid for their civil partners. ie: no additional take home $$$ over their coworkers.

  23. #20
    What if you don't pay taxes or take the deduction? Do you get the extra pay too?
    Pfizer Macht Frei!

    Openly Straight Man, Danke, Awarded Top Rated Influencer. Community Standards Enforcer.


    Quiz: Test Your "Income" Tax IQ!

    Short Income Tax Video

    The Income Tax Is An Excise, And Excise Taxes Are Privilege Taxes

    The Federalist Papers, No. 15:

    Except as to the rule of appointment, the United States have an indefinite discretion to make requisitions for men and money; but they have no authority to raise either by regulations extending to the individual citizens of America.

  24. #21
    Quote Originally Posted by Danke View Post
    What if you don't pay taxes or take the deduction? Do you get the extra pay too?
    Well you would have to ask them, but it doesn't sound like it. since its explicit purpose is to compensate employees for taxes owed.

  25. #22
    So the net effect of Google's policy is that they don't discriminate in the amount of money post-taxes they pay. It will be nice if someone sues a company that pays the same to both groups for de facto discrimination.

  26. #23
    Quote Originally Posted by specsaregood View Post
    Yes, well the title is one of those inflammatory, somewhat misleading lead-ins that we all hate so much in the media. I would have titled it: private employer makes pay changes to counteract discriminatory taxation system. But that's just me.
    THis.
    Quote Originally Posted by thehunter View Post
    ...people are very selective on what sort of discrimination is permissible, and I still see Google's actions as discrimination!
    WTF are you talking about? The discrimination is already taking place. Google is seeking out to negate its effects. How difficult is it to understand that?

  27. #24
    Quote Originally Posted by silus View Post
    WTF are you talking about? The discrimination is already taking place. Google is seeking out to negate its effects. How difficult is it to understand that?
    newbie.



  28. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  29. #25
    Quote Originally Posted by low preference guy View Post
    newbie.
    ...says the newbie.

  30. #26
    All Christians should boycott Google immediately since it's paying people around $1000 to become gay.

  31. #27
    A private business should be able to do whatever it wants, but from a business standpoint: WHY?

    Why would you pay someone so much more money if they're just as good as someone else who is married?
    The Heart of Conservatism is Libertarianism - Ronald Reagan

  32. #28
    Quote Originally Posted by silus View Post
    THis.

    WTF are you talking about? The discrimination is already taking place. Google is seeking out to negate its effects. How difficult is it to understand that?
    silus, in order to see where I am coming from, don't look at it from the post-tax perspective but from the pre-tax view. I am following this through that if a married employee can have the additional net benefit of providing coverage for his/her spouse, and (post-change) a gay employee can now provide that extra net benefit to his/her partner, Google is now paying more to employees who are not single. This flows from the view that any benefit a company provides is a redistribution of salaried benefits through the company -- in other words, to pay for this change, Google will have to have lower salaries for some of its employees than it otherwise would, including single employees who will not directly enjoy any of the benefits that Google is proposing to provide.

  33. #29
    Quote Originally Posted by thehunter View Post
    silus, in order to see where I am coming from, don't look at it from the post-tax perspective but from the pre-tax view. I am following this through that if a married employee can have the additional net benefit of providing coverage for his/her spouse, and (post-change) a gay employee can now provide that extra net benefit to his/her partner, Google is now paying more to employees who are not single. This flows from the view that any benefit a company provides is a redistribution of salaried benefits through the company -- in other words, to pay for this change, Google will have to have lower salaries for some of its employees than it otherwise would, including single employees who will not directly enjoy any of the benefits that Google is proposing to provide.
    Ah, so your entire argument is based on the assumption that Google will lower salaries for some of its employees. I'm sorry, but economic principles are not meant to be applied blindly to specific cases as fact, especially when you lack most of the details.

    I see what you're trying to say, but the bottom line is that the government is the originating source of discrimination that Google is compensating for. It may not be a perfect solution, but its a private company doing what it can. If people don't like it, then don't whine at what Google is doing, because there might be a $#@! load of other companies trying to create their own fixes. Go after the source. This is a Ron Paul forum, yet there is more criticism of Google here than the discriminating policies of the government.

  34. #30
    The free market will work this out.

    Gay employees now cost Google more than straight ones do. This added cost portends to become an increasingly large financial burden to Google, as gay job seekers will have more incentive than straight ones to take a job at Google over other opportunities. Meanwhile, straight job seekers will have the opposite incentive. And Google's competitors will find it increasingly easier to woo away those straight employees by offering them more than they get at Google, while still costing those companies less than gay employees cost Google.

    If I had Google stock, this news would be a big red flag.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast


Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 8
    Last Post: 11-20-2013, 01:19 AM
  2. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 12-26-2010, 01:16 PM
  3. Ron Paul #2 in Q3 Donations from Google Employees
    By misconstrued in forum Grassroots Central
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 10-18-2007, 01:42 AM
  4. NYT on Paul's donations from Google employees
    By Spirit of '76 in forum Grassroots Central
    Replies: 27
    Last Post: 08-24-2007, 12:31 PM
  5. It's official Ron Paul invited to speak to Google Employees
    By DisabledVet in forum Grassroots Central
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 07-10-2007, 12:37 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •