Baucus Care

[zeus3925]

From Marketwatch:
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/the...ght-2009-09-16

[YardleyLabs]

Yes, it would be cheaper for an employer to pay the fine than to provide most of the cost for health insurance.

Second, this could lead to many large corporations that have a responsiblity to thier share holders to reduce cost by not providig this perk. .

Finally, NOTHING THE GOOBERMENT GETS THIER HANDS ON GOES DOWN IN COST.

It would be cheaper for your employer to terminate benefits now. No heath insurance cost and no fine. Why haven't they done so? I'm not even trying to argue. I simply don't understand your comment. A fine for eliminating benefits would actually reduce the savings your employer could realize by terminating your plan.

[Buzz]

Yes, it would be cheaper for an employer to pay the fine than to provide most of the cost for health insurance.

Second, this could lead to many large corporations that have a responsiblity to thier share holders to reduce cost by not providig this perk.

Finally, NOTHING THE GOOBERMENT GETS THIER HANDS ON GOES DOWN IN COST.

Franco, you're really messing with my head. As an employer myself, I am trying to figure out how it would be in my best interest to stop offering a perk intended to help attract good employees, in favor of paying a fine to the federal government.

Wouldn't it be in my best interest to keep offering that perk so good employees don't leave?

Man, I think I need a beer...

[Franco]

First, do the two of y'all really think a Gov option would be competitive in the market place? Here is an analogy; How does Ford compete with GM or any other gov owned industry?

My point is that a $500. annual fine is a hell of a lot cheaper for the employer. All business could opt out of offering an insurance perk and instead, give thier employees more time off.

The gov can NOT be competitve because they own the deck, so to speak. They can set any rules they wish.They will run every private health entity out of the business.

There are a lot of financially strapped large corporations and if what Jeff is saying is accurate, then we might just see a flood of employers stop offering health benefits. Why should they if the gov wants to run it? Just as in, how will Ford be able to compete with Goverment Motors. That was BILLIONS of borrowed tax payer money the American people wil never see again.

If you don't see the socialist direction we are headed as bad, then you have to be for it. The gov has NO buisness getting into running my Health Care. I don't trust them and have 0 confidence in them to do well with it.

The reality of what the White House wants to do is have everyone that is working pay for equal coverage for those that don't. That is NOT what working Americans want!

[Buzz]

What on earth does any of that have to do with any company deciding to drop coverage and just pay the fine? They are not compelled to offer insurance coverage now except as a perk to attract workers. If I as a business owner feel it is a good thing to offer health insurance now, why on earth would I decide that because the government is going to fine me for not offering it, now it's a good thing to drop it and pay the fine? It defies logic. If anything, the rapidly escalating cost of insurance is going to be responsible for workers losing employer based insurance.

And I keep hearing, well the government plan will be more competitive, so my company might drop my private plan and move me into the government plan. Well, don't you think they are free to switch plans and companies now? Just because you have a plan that you love now doesn't mean that come next year when it's time to renew benefits, you won't get moved into a high deductible plan with less coverage than you have now. There are no minimum requirements for coverage regarding max deductible and max out of pocket expense, but there will be with the reforms.

[M&K's Retrievers]

It would be cheaper for your employer to terminate benefits now. No heath insurance cost and no fine. Why haven't they done so? I'm not even trying to argue. I simply don't understand your comment. A fine for eliminating benefits would actually reduce the savings your employer could realize by terminating your plan.

I guess you don't read others posts. They provide these benefits to attract and keep quality employees. If all employers could sh*t can their employee benefit plans they would and just pay a fine.

[Buzz]

There are a lot of financially strapped large corporations and if what Jeff is saying is accurate, then we might just see a flood of employers stop offering health benefits. Why should they if the gov wants to run it? Just as in, how will Ford be able to compete with Goverment Motors. That was BILLIONS of borrowed tax payer money the American people wil never see again.

I don't know what you mean by the government running healthcare. They are talking about offering an insurance plan to compete with private insurance, not running healthcare. They are going to mandate that employers offer health insurance or pay a fine. Right not, business is not required to offer healthcare, and if they don't there is no fine. So why would there be a flood of employers stopping their health coverage because of any reform?

[Buzz]

I guess you don't read others posts. They provide these benefits to attract and keep quality employees. If all employers could sh*t can their employee benefit plans they would and just pay a fine.

The only reason they would sh!t can their plans is if they no longer felt that they needed to offer them to attract workers, or if they couldn't afford them. In the current economic climate, either of these things could happen, independent of healthcare reform. And if that came to be, then we really need a public option that we can afford to buy on an individual basis.

[M&K's Retrievers]

The only reason they would sh!t can their plans is if they no longer felt that they needed to offer them to attract workers, or if they couldn't afford them. In the current economic climate, either of these things could happen, independent of healthcare reform. And if that came to be, then we really need a public option that we can afford to buy on an individual basis.

Isn't that what I said ?

[WRL]

If I understand what you are saying, your employer pays most of your health insurance cost now without any government compulsion in order to provide competitive compensation. You believe that once the government establishes a fine against employers that do not provide health insurance that your employer will suddenly decide to terminate the benefits it has provided without any penalty. The logic does not compute. Are you assuming that health insurance will be more expensive if the bill is passed? If anything, costs should go down since providers will not have as many patients who are unable to pay for their care and people who do not buy insurance now because they are in good health will be compelled to buy insurance, thereby reducing costs for others.

Sorry but your logic doesn't compute.

Use car insurance. Its required in my state. The people that didn't have it and never have had insurance don't have it. The people that will and always have had insurance still do, now we just pay more for it "cuz its the law".

How does my "insurance rate" go down? There are no more people going to "afford" it than can afford it now whether there is a fine or whatever.

And what if people/businesses get fined again and again.....are they gonna throw me in jail because I have no health insurance......hmmmm....get thrown in jail and guess what? Now I have FREE medical.

WRL