Here's why the new law is eventually going to drive creation of a public option

[Okla-homey]

Okay, bear with me.

If an employer, who is required to provide his employees health insurance under this POS new law, doesn't do so, his penalty is $2000.00 per employee.

OTOH, the average annual premium charged by a group health insurer he'll have to pay for an employee with a family of four is $6000.00.

Do the math.

It is impossible to convince me this cost of compliance versus cost of non-compliance disparity was deliberately included in the bill to drive nationalized healthcare eventually.

And I'm not even a tin-foil hat wearer.

[Fraggle145]

Good.

[Ike]

Okay, bear with me.

If an employer, who is required to provide his employees health insurance under this POS new law, doesn't do so, his penalty is $2000.00 per employee.

OTOH, the average annual premium charged by a group health insurer he'll have to pay for an employee with a family of four is $6000.00.

Do the math.

It is impossible to convince me this cost of compliance versus cost of non-compliance disparity was deliberately included in the bill to drive nationalized healthcare eventually.

And I'm not even a tin-foil hat wearer.

IIRC, and I may not, so take it with a grain of salt, originally the bill had much higher costs of non-compliance. I believe the far left portion of the senate watered that down after it had gotten out of committee...

[Ike]

I should also note, that I feel that had the bill included a public option, then it would have had stronger cost controls.

[Okla-homey]

Good.

How, pray tell, do we pay for any of this? I know. Eliminate the EPA!;)

[OklahomaTuba]

But premiums are going up, so at least we have that.

[OklahomaTuba]

Well the donks found a way to cut costs, just **** up "The big ****ing Deal" so bad it doesn't cover sick kids...


Under the new law, insurance companies still would be able to refuse new coverage to children because of a pre-existing medical problem, said Karen Lightfoot, spokeswoman for the House Energy and Commerce Committee, one of the main congressional panels that wrote the bill Obama signed into law Tuesday. http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Gap-in-health-care-laws-apf-4272209396.html?x=0&.v=1

[OklahomaTuba]

I should also note, that I feel that had the bill included a public option, then it would have had stronger cost controls.Kinda like how well Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security do it???

Oh, wait....

[Okla-homey]

I should also note, that I feel that had the bill included a public option, then it would have had stronger cost controls.

Like in the UK where physicians are employees of the NHS and, as a result, are ordinary upper-middle-class salaried stiffs?

You try that over here and watch the AMA super-freak like Rick James when he could afford all the cocaine he wanted.

[NormanPride]

I think many employers will still provide health plan compensation as part of their pitch for quality employees.

[Crucifax Autumn]

Kinda like how well Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security do it???

Oh, wait....

Yeah wait...I thought everyone on the right was using the fact that many doctors aren't wanting to take medicare/medicaid or the new **** because they have to accept such a low payment in comparison to what they get from individuals and insurance companies.

[Harry Beanbag]

Yeah wait...I thought everyone on the right was using the fact that many doctors aren't wanting to take medicare/medicaid or the new **** because they have to accept such a low payment in comparison to what they get from individuals and insurance companies.

What happens when we run out of doctors willing to do mostly pro bono work?

[Fraggle145]

How, pray tell, do we pay for any of this? I know. Eliminate the EPA!;)

I was thinking we could kill some babies. ;)

[GrapevineSooner]

I have a feeling that when this law actually gets enacted in full force (because if the Republicans are able to have the same kind of success in repealing this as they had in repealing the NEA and Department of Education...), there will be a number of people wonder just WTF happened. They'll see that the things that were promised in this bill more closely resemble the scenario that Jane Hamsher unfolded on the HuffPo yesterday.

And I'll be there to tell them the law of unintended consequences happened.

[OklahomaTuba]

Yeah wait...I thought everyone on the right was using the fact that many doctors aren't wanting to take medicare/medicaid or the new **** because they have to accept such a low payment in comparison to what they get from individuals and insurance companies.So what you're saying is price controls don't cut costs but cut resources???

I wonder how many times the dims have to try price controls and government interference in the market place before they realize it always makes things worse.

[OklahomaTuba]

I have a feeling that when this law actually gets enacted in full force (because if the Republicans are able to have the same kind of success in repealing this as they had in repealing the NEA and Department of Education...), there will be a number of people wonder just WTF happened. They'll see that the things that were promised in this bill more closely resemble the scenario that Jane Hamsher unfolded on the HuffPo yesterday.

And I'll be there to tell them the law of unintended consequences happened.AMEN. As much as I despise that liberal nut Hamsher, she is right on about this disaster.

[soonerboomer93]

And I'm not even a tin-foil hat wearer.

so you're saing you got a tiny noggin?

[SoonerInKCMO]

If an employer, who is required to provide his employees health insurance under this POS new law, doesn't do so, his penalty is $2000.00 per employee.

OTOH, the average annual premium charged by a group health insurer he'll have to pay for an employee with a family of four is $6000.00.

What's the penalty of non-compliance now? There isn't one, right? Yet many employers are still paying the $6000 - how is this law going to decrease the number of employers that provide insurance? :confused:

[DeadSolidPerfect]

I was thinking we could kill some babies. ;)

Obama outlawd that.



In a private signing ceremony.

[sooner59]

What's the penalty of non-compliance now? There isn't one, right? Yet many employers are still paying the $6000 - how is this law going to decrease the number of employers that provide insurance? :confused:

True. If companies refuse to offer if, they will lots of open position with less people to fill them than they once had. Employee benefits are a determining factor for some people when applying for a position.

[Fraggle145]

Obama outlawd that.



In a private signing ceremony.

True it takes the Supreme Court to eliminate the EPA...

[Crucifax Autumn]

So what you're saying is price controls don't cut costs but cut resources???

I wonder how many times the dims have to try price controls and government interference in the market place before they realize it always makes things worse.

Oh, I understand the "problems" with medicare/medicaid cost controls, I was just pointing out exactly what you are saying, but from a different viewpoint. Including stronger cost controls would have caused as many problems as not including them.

[JohnnyMack]

http://money.cnn.com/2010/05/05/news/companies/dropping_benefits.fortune/index.htm?cnn=yes&hpt=C2

Maybe the least surprising thing ever.

[Bourbon St Sooner]

How, pray tell, do we pay for any of this? I know. Eliminate the EPA!;)

Ben Bernanke and his magic printing press.

[jkjsooner]

So what you're saying is price controls don't cut costs but cut resources???

I wonder how many times the dims have to try price controls and government interference in the market place before they realize it always makes things worse.

The last person I remember to try price controls was Richard Nixon....

[Okla-homey]

What's the penalty of non-compliance now? There isn't one, right? Yet many employers are still paying the $6000 - how is this law going to decrease the number of employers that provide insurance? :confused:

Because there will come a tipping point as premiums increase (they must under the new law, its unavoidable*) at which point companies will make the business decision to either drop employer subsidized health insurance altogether or offer group policies in which co-pays and deductibles are so high people clamor for a public option, or worse, a single-payer government system.

* you simply can't require insurance companies to write policies on folks with pre-existing conditions and/or rotten health (a/k/a "bad risks") and not force up every other policyholder's premiums to make up the losses. Remember, insurance is, in the final analysis, just a risk pool in which the people who don't make claims cover the folks who do, thereby allowing the whole she-bang to stay solvent.

[GKeeper316]

But premiums are going up, so at least we have that.

premiums going up is exclusively the fault of the new health care law?

the public option is a very effective means of cost control. just look at san fransisco.

[delhalew]

How, pray tell, do we pay for any of this? I know. Eliminate the EPA!;)

No winky nessecary. I can provide a list of another hundred useless federal beaurocracies that we can trash. That would be a rise in unemployment I could handle.