79 votes to repeal medical instruments tax...

I guess you're right, Bambino. I should have expected it. Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

I answered the question, pay attention.

What expenses does it offset, CBJ7? And how many jobs have to be lost before the tax is considered a bad idea? Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

the cost of affordable healthcare, are you serious?

the industry doesn't even knowhow many or at what level in various companies... read the politifact link or the copy paste I posted from the article ... and you call me stupid? the answers are right in front of your eyes

post # 6

A May 22, 2013, Star Tribune news story said Medtronic announced 1,000 cuts worldwide in 2012 and 2,000 cuts worldwide in 2013, with about half of the latter in the U.S. The story cited "pricing pressures and sluggish sales" for the May 2013 cuts, but didn’t mention the tax.

more .....

http://www.cbpp.org/cms/?fa=view&id=3684

device-maker Stryker Corporation revealed plans last year to lay off 1,000 workers, or 5 percent of its workforce, and implement other restructuring activities. In a press release announcing the changes, Stryker cited the excise tax but also stated that the restructuring aims “to allow for continued investment in strategic areas and drive growth despite the ongoing challenging economic environment and market slowdown in elective procedures.”[18] Critics of the excise tax, however, have rushed to ascribe the layoffs to the tax.[19]> When the Columbus Dispatch investigated similar claims in Ohio, home to many small device manufacturers, it found that “industry officials could not cite an example in Ohio of a company that has cut jobs or put growth plans on hold in anticipation of the tax.”[20]


nothing tax related ..

C7 is a cut and paste wizard. A recent article in Forbes which quotes Advamed states the tax will cause 195,000 job losses in the medical device industry. Which is why Franken is doing cartwheels now. Mn is the home of Medtronic and St Jude Medical.

That was not the question, CBJ7. The question was "How many jobs can be lost before the tax is considered a bad idea?" I already know you don't have a clue as to what expenses are offset.

That was not the question, CBJ7. The question was "How many jobs can be lost before the tax is considered a bad idea?" I already know you don't have a clue as to what expenses are offset. Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

I gave you example after example stating the compamies that build the devices cant attribute the tax to job loss and you still ask your stupid question..

ask the cat , I'm done farting around with you.

So you can't or won't answer the question. Fine.

CJ rarely answers questions but you can find some goods in his crap. He recognizes that some jobs will lost but he wants to argue numbers. He has already lost the argument but is too lazy to acknowledge it.