Gay couples to be paid more to offset higher tax

[MisterCreosote]

At the risk of this thread turning into a ****show, Cambridge, Mass., will pay a stipend to its gay employees that they hope will offset the federal taxes they have to pay for putting their spouses on their healthcare plans:

http://www.boston.com/news/local/new_hampshire/articles/2011/07/10/mass_city_to_pay_wedded_gay_workers_to_offset_tax/

If this happens, I look forward with great anticipation the day that someone decides to pay me more to offset the cost of the "smoker surcharge" on my insurance plan.

 

[YGBFKM]

Complete bull****.

 

[printdust]

At the risk of this thread turning into a ****show, Cambridge, Mass., will pay a stipend to its gay employees that they hope will offset the federal taxes they have to pay for putting their spouses on their healthcare plans:

http://www.boston.com/news/local/new_hampshire/articles/2011/07/10/mass_city_to_pay_wedded_gay_workers_to_offset_tax/

If this happens, I look forward with great anticipation the day that someone decides to pay me more to offset the cost of the "smoker surcharge" on my insurance plan.

Ram-rod discrimination. And they'll make it a "hate crime" to complain about it.

You wanted the door open. Now you got to put up with the visitors.

 

[Azrael]

Too late.

 

[bigpern23]

Did Adam Sandler and Kevin James author this bill?

 

[YGBFKM]

This isn't about special treatment. We never asked for that. This has always been about equality. What, this is special treatment? Well, about time, assholes!

 

[Care Bear]

If we could get this thread locked with another "eat a ****" comment, that would be awesome.

 

[deskslave]

I'm all for gay marriage and hope DOMA gets the ax. But discrimination used to combat a discriminatory law isn't the way to go.

Except it's not discrimination. It's leveling the playing field by combating federally enshrined discrimination.

 

[LongTimeListener]

This cannot possibly stand up in court.

 

[YGBFKM]

WWAPSED?

 

[Baron Scicluna]

If we could get this thread locked with another "eat a ****" comment, that would be awesome.

A

 

[Armchair_QB]

So I would assume the City of Cambridge will be offering a stipend to women who do the exact same job as men but are paid less.

Or is that not considered discrimination?

 

[printdust]

This isn't about special treatment. We never asked for that. This has always been about equality. What, this is special treatment? Well, about time, assholes!

See? The worms are out of the box. Soon, the lake will be closed to fishing.

Soon, we'll have "set asides" for government positions. It will be mandated that a gay person must be president. Then at least the Dems can quit bitching about Bush being an "appointed" president his first term.

But this is hilarious. I knew this was coming - and more is on the way. Have fun, libs. You asked for it, you got it.

 

[printdust]

This cannot possibly stand up in court.

Oh yes it will. All those activist judges that are paving the way to everything gay are in charge, or did you forget about them?

 

[TheSportsPredictor]

You wanted the door open. Now you got to put up with the visitors.

Like you?

 

[YankeeFan]

I kind of thought this was interesting:

Now that same-sex marriage has been legalized in New York, at least a few large companies are requiring their employees to tie the knot if they want their partners to qualify for health insurance.

Corning, I.B.M. and Raytheon all provide domestic partner benefits to employees with same-sex partners in states where they cannot marry. But now that they can legally wed in New York, five other states and the District of Columbia, they will be required to do so if they want their partner to be covered for a routine checkup or a root canal.

On the surface, this appears to put the couples on an even footing with heterosexual married couples. After all, this is precisely what they have been fighting for: being treated as a spouse. But some gay and lesbian advocates are arguing that the change may have come too soon: some couples may face complications, since their unions are not recognized by the federal government.

“Even with the complications, many people will want to get married for the reasons people want to get married,” said Ross D. Levi, executive director of the Empire State Pride Agenda. “But from our perspective, to hinge something as important as insurance for your family to what is still a complicated legal matter for same-sex couples doesn’t seem to be a fair thing to do.”

He said that there were a variety of reasons — legal, financial and personal — that companies should keep the domestic partnership option at least until gay marriage was recognized at the federal level. Legally speaking, getting married could create immigration issues or it could potentially muddy the process of adopting a child. In some instances, he added, an employee may work in a gay marriage state but live in a neighboring state that does not recognize the marriage. The couple may want to wait to marry until they can be legally wed in their home state.

“There are certainly reasons why a couple may not wish to marry,” added Camilla Taylor, marriage project director at Lambda Legal. “People with certain immigration statuses might want to think very carefully before getting married. There are some types of visas that are meant to be temporary, and if you get married to someone who is a citizen, it could flag your renewal application and reflect your more permanent decision to stay.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/09/business/some-companies-want-gays-to-wed-to-get-health-benefits.html?pagewanted=print

Now, gay couples have to face the same pressures as the rest of us to get married.

I predict a lot of folks discover their partner isn't really all that interested in getting married.

 

[TheSportsPredictor]

I can go along with that, YF.

 

[JR]

Um, the culprit here isn't the city of Cambridge. It's the Defense of Marriage Act. Cambridge is just reacting to a discriminatory piece of legistlation.

 

[BTExpress]

Except it's not discrimination. It's leveling the playing field by combating federally enshrined discrimination.

And if the couple splits up, the employee takes a pay cut? Uh-huh.

 

[Armchair_QB]

I kind of thought this was interesting:

Now that same-sex marriage has been legalized in New York, at least a few large companies are requiring their employees to tie the knot if they want their partners to qualify for health insurance.

Corning, I.B.M. and Raytheon all provide domestic partner benefits to employees with same-sex partners in states where they cannot marry. But now that they can legally wed in New York, five other states and the District of Columbia, they will be required to do so if they want their partner to be covered for a routine checkup or a root canal.

On the surface, this appears to put the couples on an even footing with heterosexual married couples. After all, this is precisely what they have been fighting for: being treated as a spouse. But some gay and lesbian advocates are arguing that the change may have come too soon: some couples may face complications, since their unions are not recognized by the federal government.

“Even with the complications, many people will want to get married for the reasons people want to get married,” said Ross D. Levi, executive director of the Empire State Pride Agenda. “But from our perspective, to hinge something as important as insurance for your family to what is still a complicated legal matter for same-sex couples doesn’t seem to be a fair thing to do.”

He said that there were a variety of reasons — legal, financial and personal — that companies should keep the domestic partnership option at least until gay marriage was recognized at the federal level. Legally speaking, getting married could create immigration issues or it could potentially muddy the process of adopting a child. In some instances, he added, an employee may work in a gay marriage state but live in a neighboring state that does not recognize the marriage. The couple may want to wait to marry until they can be legally wed in their home state.

“There are certainly reasons why a couple may not wish to marry,” added Camilla Taylor, marriage project director at Lambda Legal. “People with certain immigration statuses might want to think very carefully before getting married. There are some types of visas that are meant to be temporary, and if you get married to someone who is a citizen, it could flag your renewal application and reflect your more permanent decision to stay.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/09/business/some-companies-want-gays-to-wed-to-get-health-benefits.html?pagewanted=print

Now, gay couples have to face the same pressures as the rest of us to get married.

I predict a lot of folks discover their partner isn't really all that interested in getting married.

In the interest of fairness these companies should start offering domestic partner benefits to unmarried heterosexual couples until the Feds start recognizing gay marriage.

Seems like the simplest and fairest way to handle this.