Posted on 07/09/2014 7:08:13 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
So Tanner agrees with the RATs that the bossiest boss of all, our Federal Government, should decide what is covered by our insurance. By the way, how can anything covered by you insurance be called a benefit when your being forced by people carrying guns to pay through the nose for it?
yeah. we need to stip business of this recruitment tool, and leave the field open for more government involvement.
that oughta fix everything
Getting rid of health insurance altogether would be the best solution, but too many pigs at the trough prevent this.
But without employers participating, 0bamacare won't work .... oh wait, nevermind.
I thought the author wanted the fedgov to determine insurance instead of the employer, until I read this in the article...
“But, in the context of Hobby Lobby, employer-provided insurance is even more insidious: It gives your boss the power to determine what is and is not included in your insurance plan. The government’s answer, of course, is simply to mandate that certain benefits, in this case contraceptives, be included. But that merely substitutes the government’s judgment for your boss’s. Thus we infringe on your employer’s desires and your own, leaving both of you at the mercy of politicians.”
If that’s the case, he should change the title to, “Get Bosses AND THE FEDGOV Out of Health Insurance Altogether”
Obama did his own executive order similar to the Hyde Amendment after Obamacare was signed, but it expired after one year. He did this because on 9/9/2009 in his joint session of congress he said the Feds would not pay for Abortions. How come it was not a war on women when he did it? Can someone in the press call shenanigans on him already!!!
BINGO! What started out as a voluntary benefit is now required benefit.
“There’s no good answer. The entire concept that our boss should provide our insurance is an anomaly that grew out of unique historical circumstances during World War II. At the time of a significant labor shortage, President Roosevelt imposed wage (and price) controls, preventing employers from competing for available workers by raising salaries. In an effort to circumvent the regulations and attract workers, employers began to offer non-wage benefits, among them health insurance.”
Or whether to buy it at all. The individual mandate/robert's tax needs to go.
That would mean repealing Obamacare with it fascist list of mandates.
Because health problems can result in catastrophic costs, insurance makes sense. You can't realistically set aside millions in case you accidentally kill someone, so you insure liability on your car. It makes sense to spread the risk across many people and your lifetime. Similarly, you couldn't save hundreds of thousands of dollars on the off chance that you would require a heart transplant or an extended stay in the hospital. So catastrophic insurance makes sense. "Insuring" prescription drugs and birth control do not. Why run those costs through an insurance company, driving the cost and price up? Same with yearly checkups. They're not a risk; they're a certainty. They should be paid for out of packet, not buried in an insurance premium.
The real reason why company sponsored health care is so popular is that large corporations are natural groupings of people with a variety of healthiness. Insurance companies can calculate their average expenses per employee and charge each employee (through their corporations) a reasonable rate.
So along with the other recommendations such as allowing more money to be put into HSA's, the government has to allow for the creation of non-employment based groups.
I understand that such groups exist, but if employment-based groups go away then there will be increased demand for membership in these other groups. What types of groups will be allowed? Will healthy people be able to group together to assure themselves low rates and deny entry to others based solely on their health? Will the government allow groups based solely on religious beliefs? If someone claims to be a "good Christian", but really isn't, will they be able to sue to join a Christian health group? If they are allowed in, will they be able to sue to force the group to cover contraception and abortion?
There are many more questions that are brought up by this essay than answered.
I’m vested in my former employer’s group retiree health insurance plan and my deductibles and premiums are low, or at least reasonable. I put in over 36 years to have reasonably priced insurance. Personally, I would rather my plan be run by my former employer than the Federal government. All of Obamacare needs to just go away for good.
The government should not be telling employers what that they MUST provide health insurance ... or anything else.
This is the root of the problem.
However, since they are, Congress has further compounded their error by infringing on the First Amendment rights of individuals who happen to also be employers. This is direct contradition to the Constitution, and if we have to fight on that hill I am more than happy to fight there. Without 1A we have no rights at all.
The First Amendment starts out “Congress shall make no law ...” They contradicted the Constitutuion the moment they made PPACA the law ... whether they read it or not. I have no doubt there are other Constitutional errors in the law and I hope they are all brought forth and litigated up to the Supreme Court.
This law in particular is poorly written and deeply flawed.
But the root of the problem is Congress passing so many laws to begin with. I would favor all laws automatically have a sunset clause at 7 years and further that all laws passed by stand-alone, not attached to other bills or passedin Omnibus fashion. This would at the very least slow them down and would give citizens a chance to keep track of what they are doing.
Yes. It morphed into an extremely insidious MONSTER as a tool for the Left.
AMEN
Business could still offer health insurnce VOLUNTARILY.
The problem is the government mandating that businesses must offer heath insurance.
“So Tanner agrees with the RATs that the bossiest boss of all, our Federal Government, should decide what is covered by our insurance. “
Pre-Obamacare, I had a talk with my benchmark lib. The inherent assumption was that government could be trusted with controlling what healthcare we received, but insurance companies and employers could not be trusted.
It’s just part of their worldview. It’s an assumption, a given from which they conclude all the goofy things they conclude. They never think to question it.
The corporate class is running this country. They are the paymasters for both parties. Amnesty and open borders are the current objectives.
The author’s proposal has some merit but overlooks the proverbial 800# gorilla that’s been in the room for 50 years now, FEDGOV in the form of Medicare. They now control costs and allowable charges for a certain segment yet that info is now transferred to the insurance companies, thus bollixing up what should be a direct doctor-patient relationship. Each layer of non-productive bureaucracy requires ever more overhead for the doctor and adds little or nothing to the health outcome for the patient.
Get government out of healthcare, period. What the heck is the matter with NR? Wrong argument here when we all know the problem. Let the free market reign.
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.