Company Dumps Healthcare Plan

[Dad2three]

Feel free to move to you and your three over there as fast as you can.

I'll stay and continue the Founders fine tradition of taking US more liberal thank you... SS/Medicare/Obamacares


40 hour work weeks, min wage, labor laws, union rights, environmental and workplace safety laws. civil rights, etc...YOU CAN THANK A LIBERAL

Really? Sacrificing your existence and that of your 3 kids just to make a point? You think you're some kinda martyr or does the reality have something to do with your decision to stay?

Existence? lol, As conservatives work to make US 'free' like a 3rd world nation?

 

[Care4all]

Make a spreadsheet and show your work. You do know how to make a spreadsheet right? You seem to think of yourself as a great accountant so this should be easy. It comes down to income versus expenses. You need a few columns to show that. That is the further detail I'm looking for.

I gave a basic and simplified explanation, if you want it more complicated and a spreadsheet to understand it, then do it yourself, you've got rabbi's numbers, it's not that difficult...

and sweetie, you don't stand a prayer in trying to put me down with my abilities with numbers or spreadsheets...stop making a fool of yourself....while you can.

Too late for you though.

And you are sticking your foot in your mouth and in my conversation with azmike for what reason again? Are you also AZMIKE, Listening?

 

[Dad2three]

You know.....nothing.

It was Goldwater, Nixon, Reagan, etc fighting for civil rights, SS, Medicare, etc right? lol

Hopefully not.

Those are all pipe dreams or legistlated abortions. You enjoy your S.S.. The Free Market is going to ensure I live much better than that when I retire.

Weird, history says YOU are full of it... Of course right wingers NEVER remember history because they are NEVER on the correct side of it!

 

[bripat9643]

i'm not quite sure why they won't acknowledge that.

the bizarre thing about his post is that it totally and completely ignores the fact that the point, at least as stated by the heritage foundation, was for people to "take responsibility" and insure their own health care by using the private market... which is what the ACA does.

keeping wages and benefits artificially low is what keeps people dependent on the government.

I wonder how the fucktards define "private markets" ........I wonder if the shit heads consider an entity, which is regulated by the government to the max , a "private" market?


.

Yeah, because fucktards libertarians have proven so successful EVERYWHERE it's been tried. Oh wait, it hasn't?

Yes, actually, it has.

 

[Dad2three]

This was the far left plan in the long run, to make health insurance unaffordable except through the government run exchanges.

is that another intentional lie or are you really that brainwashed and stupid?

if you're capable, read and learn.

thanks.

Original document where Heritage created Obamacare individual mandate

Right. americanblog.....Like that blog site is going to utter the facts.
Sheesh..
Get this straight
No conservative input was permitted in the cobbling together of this piece of shit law

This Is What "Bipartisanship" Looks Like


Of the 788 amendments filed, 67 came from Democrats and 721 from Republicans. (That disparity drew jeers that Republicans were trying to slow things down. Another explanation may be that they offered so many so they could later claim—as they are now, in fact, claiming—that most of their suggestions went unheeded.) Only 197 amendments were passed in the end—36 from Democrats and 161 from Republicans. And of those 161 GOP amendments, Senate Republicans classify 29 as substantive and 132 as technical.


But in this sampling, at least, it appears that a good portion of the GOP amendments offered were substantive (which, of course, is hardly a criticism). Whether that makes the bill "bipartisan" is a separate question.


Slate examines the GOP amendments to a Senate health care bill.

 

[Dad2three]

I wonder how the fucktards define "private markets" ........I wonder if the shit heads consider an entity, which is regulated by the government to the max , a "private" market?


.

Yeah, because fucktards libertarians have proven so successful EVERYWHERE it's been tried. Oh wait, it hasn't?

Yes, actually, it has.

Place? State OR nation? EVER? lol

 

[bripat9643]

I'll stay and continue the Founders fine tradition of taking US more liberal thank you... SS/Medicare/Obamacares


40 hour work weeks, min wage, labor laws, union rights, environmental and workplace safety laws. civil rights, etc...YOU CAN THANK A LIBERAL

Really? Sacrificing your existence and that of your 3 kids just to make a point? You think you're some kinda martyr or does the reality have something to do with your decision to stay?

Existence? lol, As conservatives work to make US 'free' like a 3rd world nation?

Freedom is the last thing they have in third world nations. Those governments have all adopted the policies you favor. Take Venezuela and Cuba, for instance.

 

[bripat9643]

Yeah, because fucktards libertarians have proven so successful EVERYWHERE it's been tried. Oh wait, it hasn't?

Yes, actually, it has.

Place? State OR nation? EVER? lol

The United States before 1914, for one.

 

[bripat9643]

I'll stay and continue the Founders fine tradition of taking US more liberal thank you... SS/Medicare/Obamacares


40 hour work weeks, min wage, labor laws, union rights, environmental and workplace safety laws. civil rights, etc...YOU CAN THANK A LIBERAL

And that's worked out well? Detroit had all of that at one point. Look at them now.

Don't understand a city that dies because of national policies (see conservatives 'free trade', trickle down, etc) huh

Why does one city die when others are thriving? Notice that all the ones dying are run by Democrats.

 

[Vandalshandle]

My 50 year career in the health insurance industry, most of which was VP of Underwriting, was to tell sick people, "No" when they applied for insurance. I am sure that hundreds died as a result of my decisions. Thankfully, what I used to do for a living is now illegal.

You have to wonder how it was ever legal to start with.

Oh, that's right....government regulation. Insurance is one of the most heavily regulated industries there is.

Nope. It was the LACK of government regulation that allowed companies to decline health insurance applicants for pre-existing conditions. In fact, until HIPPA was legislated, the federal government had absolutely no jurisdiction over health insurance companies. That is why there is a Insurance Commissioner in every state. I was also VP of Compliance, and most state insurance laws were so lenient, that my job was mostly just going through the motions to get their approval for whatever we wanted to do. New York was a dramatic exception. If a health insurance company wanted to do business in New York, they had to follow their laws in every other state. Most health insurance companies avoided that by setting up a separate company to do business in New York.

 

[Listening]

My 50 year career in the health insurance industry, most of which was VP of Underwriting, was to tell sick people, "No" when they applied for insurance. I am sure that hundreds died as a result of my decisions. Thankfully, what I used to do for a living is now illegal.

You have to wonder how it was ever legal to start with.

Oh, that's right....government regulation. Insurance is one of the most heavily regulated industries there is.

Nope. It was the LACK of government regulation that allowed companies to decline health insurance applicants for pre-existing conditions. In fact, until HIPPA was legislated, the federal government had absolutely no jurisdiction over health insurance companies. That is why there is a Insurance Commissioner in every state. I was also VP of Compliance, and most state insurance laws were so lenient, that my job was mostly just going through the motions to get their approval for whatever we wanted to do. New York was a dramatic exception. If a health insurance company wanted to do business in New York, they had to follow their laws in every other state. Most health insurance companies avoided that by setting up a separate company to do business in New York.

Garbage. What you are saying is that state regulators failed to do their job.

At the same time, they created a huge barrier to entry for anyone who wanted to get into the business. I know people who tried.

 

[Missouri_Mike]

Here is one of the foibles of ACA.....And this comes straight from my Chiropractor's financial admin....She told me that die to ACA rules, if a new patient so much as mentions they are covered by a health insurance policy, by law, the office MUST bill that company for the patient's treatment.
Now, here's the real pisser. Because my insurance did not cover for Chiropractic as "well care" I became a cash customer.
I pay $45 for an adjustment plus a nice traction stretch or stim pad session....
And insured patient 'pays' $155 for the same thing. Of course the reimbursement is much lower.
It is cheaper to be a cash patient. But Obamacare does not want people paying for medical care. And the geniuses in DC made sure of that. Pricks.
How dare a bunch of politicians tell the American people they may not pay for their own health care?!!!!

Same here. My bone cracker charges me 40 per visit. Our insurance no longer covers chiropractic thanks to obiecare. But it does give us all the prenatal care and birth control a woman of 43 with a hysterectomy could ever need.

Weird, YOUR state (let me guess red Arizona) doesn't require chiropractic care? I'm shocked

Chiropractic as a Covered Benefit

Almost every state has selected a benchmark plan that includes chiropractic as an essential benefit.




Alabama: $600 per year
Alaska: 12 visits per year
Arizona: 20 visits per year
Arkansas: 30 visits per year
Connecticut: 20 visits per year
Delaware: 30 visits per year
Florida: 26 visits per year
Georgia: 20 visits per year
Idaho: $800 per year
Illinois: $1,000 per year
Indiana: 12 visits per year
Kentucky: 12 visits per year
Maine: 40 visits per year
Massachusetts: 12 visits per year
Michigan: 30 visits per year
Mississippi: 20 visits per year
Missouri: 26 visits per year
Montana: $600 per year
Nebraska: 20 visits per year
Nevada: 12 visits per year
North Carolina: 30 visits per year
North Dakota: 20 visits per year
Ohio: 12 visits per year
Oklahoma: 25 visits per year
Pennsylvania: 20 visits per year
Rhode Island: 12 visits per year
Tennessee: 20 visits per year
Texas: 35 visits per year
Vermont: 12 visits per year
Virginia: 30 visits per year
Washington: 10 visits per year
Wyoming: 15 visits per year


Chiropractic as a Covered Benefit

YEAH, OBAMACARES FAULT *SHAKING HEAD*

You seem to be so shit ass stupid as to believe since the government mandates it you automatically get it.

Yes, I could have some chiro visits under my plan...but unlike you believe they aren't "free".

There is a cost involved to reach the deductable. Much like you can pay your healthcare deductable and then go see a dentist and SURPRISE! That's a whole new deductable.

Nothing comes free you moron, no matter how many laws you pass.

 

[Politico]

All the more reason why healthcare shouldn't be tied to employment.

If this is a step towards single payer/universal healthcare then I applaud it. Anything that gets us closer to a healthcare system like every other industrialized nation is utilizing is a good thing.

Without government control they can't thin out the herd.

 

[RDD_1210]

Yes, actually, it has.

Place? State OR nation? EVER? lol

The United States before 1914, for one.

Lol! You are the very definition of a regressive. Thanks for reminding us.

 

[JoeB131]

[

it wasn't unintended. They know it will bust the system, so in 10 years or so they can roll out what they really want, single payer.

The DMV model of health care.

I wish Health care ran like the DMV. Last time I went to the DMV, It took me all of six minutes to sign in, pay for my license, get my eye test, have my picture taken and get my new license issued.

As for busting the system, the system was already busted. 1 out of four Americans had either no insurance or inadequate insurance. We spend more than any other nation per capita and we get the worst results in the Industrialized world.

 

[M14 Shooter]

So? Maybe if you didn't cut off half my quote, you wouldn't need to ask, "so?"

Oh.. so you -don't- have a sustainable point.
10-4. Thank you.

What? You literally deleted half of my original statement that answered your "so?" question. Which part is confusing you?

I'm not confused at all.
You're appealing to popularity; as such, your argument fails.

 

[NYcarbineer]

You're ignoring the cost of the government subsidies, moron.

The million dollar penalty goes towards the subsidies.

So you should want a large number of companies to opt out. Of course that flies in the face of covering more people and making it affordable... Circular reasoning belongs in circular files.

I've supported getting businesses out of the healthcare business for years.

 

[The Rabbi]

A friend of mine is the benefits manager for a small company (500 employees). He tells me as of 12/31 they will no longer offer health insurance. Why?
Well, currently they spend $4M/yr on health coverage for their employees. The employees kick in another 1.5M. By dropping coverage he pays the $1M penalty. But in return he can give each employee $350/mo towards their own coverage and still come out ahead. Some employees can get more even more if the company wants to keep them. The lower paid employees can qualify for gov't subsidies, which they couldnt before because the company offered a health plan. ANd between subsidies and employer contribution they can pick exactly the coverage they want, so better for them.
All in all it's a win win for employer and employee. But since this is a zero sum game the loser is of coure the taxpayer, who will be subsidizing all the lower paid employees who dont have coverage from their jobs.
This will of course drive up the cost of Obamacare astronomically.

Every company similiarly situated is doing exactly the same analysis and they will come to exactly the same concliusions: cheaper to kick employees off the plan and just pay them a little extra.

Figuring the $4 million spent on healthcare, is actually about $2.6 million net for the company, because tax code gave them a 35% tax break on the $4 million deduction.

-----------------------------------------
to pay each employee $350 a month X 12 Months X 500 employees is $2.1 million, but this would give you a business deduction so you would save 35% in taxes on that as well....so that could net out to $1,365,000....

plus another +/-10% for SS taxes and Medicare taxes on the $2.1 million gross salaries, (plus higher rate in UE fees for avg employee pay being higher...)so, add $210,000 to the $1,365,000, so we are at $1,575,000 for the employer....

PLUS the $1,000,000 in yearly tax assessment penalties, which is NOT tax deductible as a business expense.

soooo thats about $2.575 million a year....

THERE IS NO SAVINGS
to this company in your example

It is about the same amount of money for the owner to try to skirt the situation of paying for employee's health care insurance, WITHOUT giving the employee the benefit of having insurance, without the company's ability to recruit better employees by having the health insurance benefit...

It's a LOSE, LOSE for the employee and the employer...there is no way around that....

and sure, for those of the 500 that are getting paid piss poorly, the exchange could help them, but for most of the employees, in a company that is large enough to have 500 employees, are probably getting paid well enough to not get that much of a subsidy if any at all, and also more than likely, many employees could have a spouse that works and they would have to go on their spouse's plan, and not the exchange with subsidy help...and the spouse's employer is ONLY responsible for making the employee portion affordable, not a family plan...so their employees majorly get dicked with just the $350 gross, that is really $250 net....

And I would have to ask, why would any ETHICAL company, put their employee's health care expense on to the tax payers if it does not save them a dime to do such...if they are going to have to pay the $2.6 million net regardless with a plan like the one you mentioned above?

Makes no sense....

other than intentionally trying to bankrupt us as a Nation....and that is not a laughing matter....

Btw, the penalty for Romneycare was even less for employers in Massachusetts, so there was more incentive for the businesses to just drop it and let their employees get subsidized by the State, but guess what?

They didn't drop employee insurance, coverage actually increased for the number of employers carrying coverage for their employees....

so if a +/-$250 an employee penalty didn't make these businesses jump ship and save the money on health insurance benefits, then why would you think they would jump ship with a $2000 a head penalty?

You're assuming they're paying 35% in taxes.
You're assuming a bunch of stuff. Like you know WTF you're talking about. You don't. That's obvious. Even in your bogus example the company still saves money, plus dumps the time and effort involved in providing one size fits all insurance for 500 people.
As for dumping people on the public exchange, companies respond to the incentives given. Obamacare incentivized doing exactly that. Which is why it will happen all over.

 

[JoeB131]

The kind of companies that are dumping their employees into the exchanges are the kind of half-ass operations that won't be around in five years.

 

[The Rabbi]

My 50 year career in the health insurance industry, most of which was VP of Underwriting, was to tell sick people, "No" when they applied for insurance. I am sure that hundreds died as a result of my decisions. Thankfully, what I used to do for a living is now illegal.

You have to wonder how it was ever legal to start with.

Oh, that's right....government regulation. Insurance is one of the most heavily regulated industries there is.

He talking about turning down people with pre-existing conditions for insurance coverage. Why wouldn't you? Do you shop for homeowners when your house is on fire? Do you sign up for auto insurance after wrecking the car? Why should this be any different? Insurance companies aren't charitable institutions. They exist to make a profit for their shareholders, as well as provide coverage for their existing policyholders. If they signed up every guy with Stage 3 cancer they'd go broke very quickly, and they wouldnt be able to cover the guy who suddenly needed a hip replacement or whatever. He's complaining about turning down people who lied on their application. Why? I dunno.