Thread: Health care bill starting to show its true colors.

Originally Posted by deathgodusmc

So basically its not saying that a company doesn't care for its employees but more to the line of if they are going to have coverage anyway then why spend the money on a seperate plan.

That was the goal all along, in my opinion.

Originally Posted by Alundil

That was the goal all along, in my opinion.

How could it have been their goal all along? They weren't the ones pushing for a health care law or am i misconstruing your point?

Originally Posted by deathgodusmc

How could it have been their goal all along? They weren't the ones pushing for a health care law or am i misconstruing your point?

You misunderstood - the goal of the healthcare plan, imo, was to stamp out the "scourge of private health insurance companies." Not by directly acting against them, but instead by allowing them (private businesses)to "follow the money". In essence, if Company "_________" pays over $10,000 per year in health related benefits per employee then it is cheaper for said company to drop the employee health care coverage, pay the $2000/employee/year fine and bank the remaining $8,000/employee/year. If company "________2" pays over $2000/employee/year, it is still cheaper for them to drop the health insurance coverage and back the difference.

This is all possible because the government would then facilitate, via the exchange, health care coverage for the individual. However, being in the Health Care industry and seeing all of the financial documentation that is "coming" things are going to get rocky for everyone. Not just the Health Care industry itself. Everyone will have to make do with less. Less coverage. Less care. Less access. Some people here are correct when they say that everyone will be covered. However, that coverage/care/access/quality will not be what it is today. It is not possible. There are not enough health care providers (from nurses on up) to care for the existing patient load in this country. UHC will only serve to exacerbate that.

I see your point now.

Jeez, do people read their own links anymore? Or did you just skim the first two paragraphs?

"The tax is 40 percent of the value of a plan above $10,200 for individual coverage and $27,500 for a family plan. Family coverage now averages about $13,800."

It's only going to affect plans that are over twice the average cost. So, like trigger said, that is people in upper management, not normal people.

It's also bullshit that they will just drop people and think they can take a $2,000 hit.

"That's because employers get to deduct the cost of workers' health care from the company's taxes. Take away the health plan and two things happen: Employers lose the deduction and they'll probably have to pay workers more to get them to accept the benefit cut. Not only will the company's income taxes go up, but the employer will also face a bigger bill for Social Security and Medicare payroll taxes. So it's not as simple as paying $2,000 and walking away."

And

"MIT economist Jon Gruber says it's impossible to create new government benefits without some unintended consequences, but he doesn't see a big drop in employer coverage. "This is a brave new world with uncertainties," said Gruber. But "the best available evidence suggests a small erosion. It's not going go down wildly.""

I'll trust the economist in your own article instead of listening to the whining by the people within the companies. Where's the outrage over a system that allows companies like Walmart to dump their employees on government aid? No, some people are too busy complaining over fabricated issues to worry about the real problems.

Originally Posted by Fovezer

Jeez, do people read their own links anymore? Or did you just skim the first two paragraphs?

"The tax is 40 percent of the value of a plan above $10,200 for individual coverage and $27,500 for a family plan. Family coverage now averages about $13,800."

It's only going to affect plans that are over twice the average cost. So, like trigger said, that is people in upper management, not normal people.

It's also bullshit that they will just drop people and think they can take a $2,000 hit.

"That's because employers get to deduct the cost of workers' health care from the company's taxes. Take away the health plan and two things happen: Employers lose the deduction and they'll probably have to pay workers more to get them to accept the benefit cut. Not only will the company's income taxes go up, but the employer will also face a bigger bill for Social Security and Medicare payroll taxes. So it's not as simple as paying $2,000 and walking away."

And

"MIT economist Jon Gruber says it's impossible to create new government benefits without some unintended consequences, but he doesn't see a big drop in employer coverage. "This is a brave new world with uncertainties," said Gruber. But "the best available evidence suggests a small erosion. It's not going go down wildly.""

I'll trust the economist in your own article instead of listening to the whining by the people within the companies. Where's the outrage over a system that allows companies like Walmart to dump their employees on government aid? No, some people are too busy complaining over fabricated issues to worry about the real problems.

The loopholes already in government and those that will be created by this law will more then compensate for what companies will be able to do. If you only knew the amount of shit that can be written off by a company legally. They are not sweating the fines one bit and already know the will be able to write them off as well.

Originally Posted by Fovezer

I'll trust the economist in your own article instead of listening to the whining by the people within the companies.

When the people in charge of your company are no longer "whining" and are making changes to budgets, changes to staff improvement/expansion, changes to expected levels of care....I'll take that over the projections of any economist quoted in an article.

My employer leadership has already informed all of our directors/managers that there will be no additional hiring beyond what was already budgeted this year. From this point forward, we'll be asked to evaluate what processes can be out-sourced to India and 3rd Party Contracting (off shoring) will pick up the slack....so we're told. We've been overworked and understaffed since a 10% cost reduction last year (and we were understaffed before that happened).

But, I realize that was somewhat of a "personal anecdote" so feel free to disregard. However, it IS exactly what's happening and will continue to happen, regardless of what the White House and the news reports state.

Originally Posted by Alundil

My employer leadership has already informed all of our directors/managers that there will be no additional hiring beyond what was already budgeted this year. From this point forward, we'll be asked to evaluate what processes can be out-sourced to India and 3rd Party Contracting (off shoring) will pick up the slack....so we're told. We've been overworked and understaffed since a 10% cost reduction last year (and we were understaffed before that happened).

That blanket they threw you isn't helping keep you warm while you tread water?

You mean they are throwing blankets now for help?