60% of firms to kill health insurance, charge more under Obamacare

Washington Examiner ^

[TigerClaws]

A majority of small business owners and manufacturers are mulling drastic changes to comply with Obamacare, with 21 percent set to drop health insurance to workers altogether and 38 percent planning to make employees pay much more.

[Wolfie]

Health insurance shouldn’t be tied to employment anyway. With the money these companies save by ditching it, they’ll be able to give their employees a raise, and the workers can negotiate for themselves on the insurance market. As it should be.

[dljordan]

“With the money these companies save by ditching it, they’ll be able to give their employees a raise, and the workers can negotiate for themselves on the insurance market. As it should be.”

No Wolfie, they’ll keep the money and give the executives a bonus. Most of the workers won’t be able to negotiate as good a price with the insurance companies and so won’t be able to afford insurance.

[SargeK]

I agree with your premise, but must disagree with your conclusion.

The result will be, as intended by those who crafted the law, the end of private insurance and the forced migration into government healthcare.

What they’ve done for school lunches they will soon do for your chemotherapy.

[radioone]

“they’ll keep the money and give the executives a bonus”

Oh, goodness, don’t tell me you might be precluded from getting your “fair share”.

[RicocheT]

True, in a free market, workers should focus on wages and not health insurance benefits as they could do better buying health insurance that matches their needs on their own.

The problem with ObamaCare and employers ending employer contributions for employee health insurance is there is not going to be a free market for employees to shop for an insurance company offering a better deal. ObamaCare is a big sponge that will suck all money and regulatory power as to health matters to it and its government masters. Private insurance companies will end offering health insurance and shift to life, property,commercial and casualty line as health lines will be not economical to stay with.

[RicocheT]

Seniors who think AARP will give unbiased information on Medicare or ObamaCare issues are naive.

“AARP’s $2.8 Billion Medigap Windfall from ObamaCare Hurts Seniors”

http://cfif.org/v/index.php/commentary/56-health-care/1590-aarps-28-billion-medigap-windfall-from-obamacare-hurts-seniors

[dljordan]

“Oh, goodness, don’t tell me you might be precluded from getting your “fair share”.”

Don’t be a smart ass.

[whattajoke]

1. Reviewing the methodology, those polled were small business owners; very few with “corporate executives.”

2. Insurance costs to employers (and thus employees) have risen every year. Framing it the way this article has doesn’t really mean anything.

3. When dropping benefits, it is expected that employers compensate employees for this compensation loss - and they will, or they won’t have workers anymore.

4. Actually, I think they have to as part of ObamaCare. (Not sure.)

5. Private insurance exchanges are about to explode. They’ve been approved in 49 states and will compete with the crappy state and federal exchanges. Brokers have incentive to sell on the private exchanges (not much though) and people who care about their health and family will go with private exchanges - keeping the private insurers in business.

[Sans-Culotte]

True, in a free market, workers should focus on wages and not health insurance benefits as they could do better buying health insurance that matches their needs on their own.

Insurance is a part of one's benefit package, like pension plans, bonuses, etc. One may choose to work for an employer or not, based on the entire package. I know my employer will drop our insurance, pay the fine, and pocket the savings.

[SargeK]

I hope your conclusion is correct, but I don’t think it will be borne out.

The cost of employer-provided health insurance really cannot be separated from wages from the employer’s perspective - the sum of wages and benefits are all part of the cost of an employee.

So far as I can tell, Obamacare is structured to encourage employers to one of several things, none of them good for the employees: Drop coverage completely and pay a $2,000.00 penalty; drop headcount under the minimum (50?) for the law to apply; reduce hours or use more temps/contractors to minimize full timers; hammer employees with higher deductibles and premium shares.

The result will be masssive numbers of people who are kicked out of employer-sponsored plans. The employers will use this as a chance to substantially reduce their cost of compensation. Employees will not see anything remotely approaching a comensurate increase in monetary compensation, certainly not anywhere near enough to buy adequate insurance as an individual. The individual’s bargaining and purchasing power is nothing like that of an employer. The individual exchanges will not materialize, or at least not fast enough to avoid a meme taking hold that the only alternative is to have Uncle Sugar step in and give you ‘free’ healthcare (that will be paid for by ‘making the 1% pay their fair share’). In return, every election going forward (until the country collapses under the fiscal burden) will be a choice of which candidate promises more goodies. That is, for a while, then it will be be a choice of which candidate make the more solemn face when promising to uneff the national healthcare system that let your grandmother die choking on her dentures on a gurney in the janitor’s closet, or that didn’t let you get a CAT scan until your tumor was Stage IV and then said it was past time for chemo. (”Care for some pentobarbital”?)

End result is the same, you will have free healthcare - right up until you get really sick. Then, Citizen, you must do your patriotic duty and get out there on that ice floe. The cost of your care is preventing us from giving out more free phones. Actually, it will be more compassionate than that - they’ll let you take the blue pill - right after you sign this donor card.

[whattajoke]

The cost of employer-provided health insurance really cannot be separated from wages from the employer’s perspective - the sum of wages and benefits are all part of the cost of an employee.

I disagree with this. Any company with a competent HR department knows to the penny the cost of each employee to the company; from wages to benefits to rented space, phone lines, T3 lines, chairs, etc. We're all dollar amounts and companies know each and every one. (As far as what each EE costs the insurer, that depends on fully vs self insured. Even without that knowledge, in small companies when one EE gets an expensive cancer or whatever, the employer gets a rough idea of the costs.)

The headcount is indeed 50 for now, rising to 100 (I think) in a couple years. The contention about higher deductibles is absolutely on point.

It's been happening in the northeast for years now and it's out of control. (My family HDHP has us paying the first $8K - and my our plan is through my wife's employer: One of the top 3 insurers in the country. Go figure.)

With HDHP's (which only work in more highly compensated regions) we get all sorts of ancillary benefits offered - usually 100% voluntary. Whoop de Doo. Where these types of packages can be absorbed (DC to Boston is where it's taking off), they will be. Where it can't be, (everywhere else), yes, you'll see more and more companies dropping private plans.

But, at least for now, employers are offering the choice to go to the exchanges or to buy into the company plans. (Sears just announced they were doing this.) Now we'll see what the market will bear. The problem is, to me, ignorance.

I've know a lot about health and other insurance. But it's still insanely confusing. (I liken it to how 30 yrs ago almost anyone could work on a car. No no one can. 30 yrs ago, you had an indemnity plan or maybe a PPO. Anyone could figure them out. Now, criminy, HSA's, HRA's, etc are just nuts. How in the world the ordinary consumer is going to make informed decisions is a huge hurdle to overcome.

Not that it ever will be OR anyone will do anything about it. Anyway, I can tell you that at least for now, small employers are planning (according to surveys) to compensate employees to guide them to exchanges. However, it's entirely possible one biggie (say, McD's or SBUX or WalMart) won't and then the dominoes fall.

Many brokers feel that their lives will suck for the next 3 years but then when consumers realize their "cheaper" exchange plans are useless, their demand will drive a move back to company sponsored plans. (Hope and change all over again!)

I know it's contrarian to say here, but a HUGE problem with "the system" now IS our human nature to prolong life beyond where it perhaps should be prolonged. the burden is HUGE across the board of pancreatic cancer victims draining coffers for 3 months of impaired life. I don't have the answer for this, and i'd probably do the same, and no one will ever talk about it - except doctors themselves. Doctors let themselves die MUCH faster from terminal disease than non doctors. Sort of interesting to think about.

[Wuli]

I put it into FB