Posted on 07/02/2009 2:04:30 PM PDT by Lorianne
The big news of the morning is a new version of the Senate HELP Committee's health-care reform bill that seems to have everyone confused. The short version is this: CBO estimates that by 2019 the bill will cover 21 million people at a cost of $597 billion. But -- and this is important -- the HELP Committee's bill doesn't include the Medicaid expansion, because Medicaid is under the sole jurisdiction of the Finance Committee. But if Medicaid is expanded to 150 percent, it will cover an additional 20 million at a cost of about $1 trillion. Add in the savings that Finance is expected to get from reforming Medicare and you're looking at a bill that will cost $1 trillion to $1.3 trillion and cover 42 million people (which would mean 97 percent of the legal population in 2019 would have health insurance) by 2019.
The importance of this set of numbers can be understood only in terms of the catastrophe that was the last set of numbers. On June 15, the Congressional Budget Office scored an incomplete version of this bill. The office estimated that it would cost $1 trillion over 10 years and cover 16 million people. It would've cost, in other words, 70 percent more and covered 20 percent fewer people. The big question, then, is what accounts for the change? And luckily, there's a simple answer: the employer mandate.
The June 15th proposal didn't include an employer mandate. And without one, the news was grim: Employers would drop coverage for 15 million employees and send them to the Health Insurance Exchange where they would need government subsidies to afford health insurance. That meant costs exploded and coverage contracted. Health reform looked like a bum deal.
(Excerpt) Read more at voices.washingtonpost.com ...
I think this was peeing himself with glee writing this article.
If Pres Buckwheat thinks unemployment is high now, wait till an employer mandate is passed. You can add both of my employees to the unemployment line. I will downsize my business so it will feed me and F^)# the rest of ‘em!...red
>> The new version of the HELP bill includes an employer mandate for firms with more than 25 workers.
“The new version of the HELP bill includes an employer mandate for firms with more than 25 workers. “
I wonder if anyone has done the math on 29-person companies that will suddenly see a need to reduce headcount by 5 or 6?
Or 63-employee organizations that will spin off a 21 person subsidiary and a 23 person subsidiary... and 19 unemployed?
Or... well, you get the picture.
Most of the "reform" is just telling doctors, hospitals and pharmacies that the government will be paying less than asked for, thus shifting even more of the costs than they are doing now to people insured outside of government progams and driving up their insurance costs. Someday medical providers will just say that they lose too much money on government customers and only deal with normal insurance and self paying patients.
Another option is to fire one third of the employees and require the other two thirds to work 60 hour weeks if they want to keep their jobs. Time and a half for the last 20 hours will be cheaper than paying insurance for the entire former staff.
>> Another option is to fire one third of the employees and require the other two thirds to work 60 hour weeks if they want to keep their jobs.
Ah, the innovative, “can do” approach of American small business! I love it!
This is what has effectively happened in my state (Hawaii) where employers are required to provide health insurance to employeess who work 20 hours per week or more. (1974 law)
There are a lot of people with 2 (or more) part-time jobs ... and no health insurance.
Or even better firing all the employees and bringing them back as “consultants”.
Obama wants to include the 12 million illegal aliens and their extended families in Mexico. Has he pointed out how much additional cost that would add. How much additional money would that save us? (sarcasm)
Unfunded liability for Medicare & Social Security is $107 Trillion ($89+ Trillion + $17+ Trillion). What would adding amnesty to that figure cost?
I’m sure you’ve seen the email about the business guy who needs to lay off six workers, so he picks ‘em by going out to the parking lot and finding cars with Obama stickers.
Soon it may be more than an urban myth. If it’s not already.
>> Or even better firing all the employees and bringing them back as “consultants”.
I think the future is bright for independent contractors of all sorts.
I can see a return to the “guild” concept as well.
The Law of Unintended Consequences is alive and well.
Ref, Post #10
Incorrectly posted cap’n tax link to Post #10 (Urge you to read it anyway). Please see following link:
http://www.ncpa.org/sub/dpd/index.php?Article_ID=18076
This is unconscienable! What right does the government have to issue employer mandates? Why don’t they just go ahead and mandate $200,000 salaries and new cars for all employees while they’re at it?
I have no doubt this has already happened ... also the reverse.
This concept is expanding in my industry (Architecture/Engineering).
Plus plenty of people ‘outsource’ via computer to places like Viet Nam, Phillipines,etc. I expect that trend to accelerate when these new mandates go into effect.
If you want to work in A/E for an American company, you might have to leave the country.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.