The latest electronic newsletter from WM had a particularly "fascinating" link whose title speaks for itself:  "Costs Aren' t Killing Employer Health Benefits." 

They aren' t, huh?  If it really isn' t costs, what might it be that' s been driving so many employers to cut back on employees' health coverage and engage in discrimination against older employees and applicants?

Could it just be pure, unadulterated lust for ever more profit at the expense of every other consideration (except, of course, when it comes to another "reason" why employers want to cut our compensation and jobs--ever-higher salaries. benefits, and perks for top executives and managers!)--can you say "greed"?

To get yet more useful fly-on-the-wall perspectives about how many employers really "think" and what they really think and say about us, the newsletter issue has one particularly revealing online forum discussion in which the initial poster to the thread in question asks:  "Anyone have any suggestions about how to find out which state' s laws are considered least employee-friendly?"

Hmmm.  This person seems to be asking this question hoping to find, not stay away from, the state with such laws.  (Many said Florida won this "distinction," while several nominated certain other Southern states; one also suggested rural Western states as possibilities.)