(30% of) Firms to cut health plans as reform starts: survey

[markomalley]

From Marketwatch (a publication of the Dow Jones company…not a blog):
Once provisions of the Affordable Care Act start to kick in during 2014, at least three of every 10 employers will probably stop offering health coverage, a survey released Monday shows.

While only 7% of employees will be forced to switch to subsidized-exchange programs, at least 30% of companies say they will “definitely or probably” stop offering employer-sponsored coverage, according to the study published in McKinsey Quarterly.

The survey of 1,300 employers says those who are keenly aware of the health-reform measure probably are more likely to consider an alternative to employer-sponsored plans, with 50% to 60% in this group expected to make a change. It also found that for some, it makes more sense to switch. I’m actually surprised that more employers haven’t owned up to dropping their employees’ health coverage. It appears that there is up to a $3,000 per employee per year fine that is assessed to companies who don’t provide coverage, but, according to the Kaiser Family Foundation 2010 health care survey, the average cost of single person coverage is over $5,000 per year. Doesn’t make business sense for any company to provide health coverage for their employees (starting in 2014).

 

[cemiller]

So much for healthcare for all, though I’m sure the government will raise the fines to 10,000 just to force the busnisess to comply, after all the want to force us to by a product from private companies…

 

[mary_bobo]

And that was the plan all along–to get single payer. I don’t think most of us will be pleased when it comes to implementation.

 

[Roselle]

As Obama campaigned, “no one is going to loose their health care coverage.” So much for that promise.

Saw Michelle Malkin found some other problems with Obamacare, what was said, and what is reality.

“The ravages of Obamacare “reform,” continued”

michellemalkin.com/2011/06/07/the-ravages-of-obamacare-reform/

Excerpts:

Propaganda: “No one is going to lose their coverage.” – Obama administration, November 2010
Reality: Firms to cut health plans as reform starts: survey; 30% of companies say they’ll stop offering coverage – MarketWatch, June 2011

&

Propaganda: Obamacare will lower premiums, save money! – Peter Orszag, November 2010
Reality: Out-of-pocket medical expenses skyrocketing, May 2011

&

Propaganda: You can’t seriously question the constitutionality of Obamacare! – Nancy Pelosi, October 2009

Reality: The constitutional challenges keep on coming. Latest from Richard Epstein and Mario Loyola in the WSJ today:

 

[1holycatholic]

The Democratic “health care” scheme violates the Church’s teachings on subsidiarity, respect for the life of the human person and respect for the dignity of the human person. It’s a trifecta of evil.

And it’s unconstitutional to boot, not that that matters to the Party of Death.

 

[Scott_Lafrance]

The Democratic “health care” scheme violates the Church’s teachings on subsidiarity, respect for the life of the human person and respect for the dignity of the human person. It’s a trifecta of evil.

And it’s unconstitutional to boot, not that that matters to the Party of Death.

http://i23.photobucket.com/albums/b381/sclafrance2/Oval_Lavatory.jpg

 

[SVP]

The Democratic “health care” scheme violates the Church’s teachings on subsidiarity, respect for the life of the human person and respect for the dignity of the human person. It’s a trifecta of evil.

And it’s unconstitutional to boot, not that that matters to the Party of Death.

from the official Democrat 2008 Party Platform:

Choice
The Democratic Party strongly and unequivocally supports Roe v. Wade and a woman’s right
to choose a safe and legal abortion, regardless of ability to pay, and we oppose any and all
efforts to weaken or undermine that right.

The Democratic Party also strongly supports access to comprehensive affordable family
planning services and age-appropriate sex education which empower people to make informed
choices and live healthy lives. We also recognize that such health care and education
help reduce the number of unintended pregnancies and thereby also reduce the need for
abortions.
The Democratic Party also strongly supports a woman’s decision to have a child by ensuring
access to and availability of programs for pre- and post-natal health care, parenting skills, income support, and caring adoption programs.

 

[valentino]

I don’t blame them.Seeing that its just going to cost them more to cover their employees why not bail out.If O.wants to help the poor get insurance coverage he shouldn’t force people to help them in his way.People aren’t dying in the streets due to lack of medical coverage and as far as I know hospitals aren’t turning destitute people away because they can’t pay.

 

[1holycatholic]

from the official Democrat 2008 Party Platform:

Choice
The Democratic Party strongly and unequivocally supports Roe v. Wade and a woman’s right
to choose a safe and legal abortion, regardless of ability to pay, and we oppose any and all
efforts to weaken or undermine that right.

The Democratic Party also strongly supports access to comprehensive affordable family
planning services and age-appropriate sex education which empower people to make informed
choices and live healthy lives. We also recognize that such health care and education
help reduce the number of unintended pregnancies and thereby also reduce the need for
abortions.
The Democratic Party also strongly supports a woman’s decision to have a child by ensuring
access to and availability of programs for pre- and post-natal health care, parenting skills, income support, and caring adoption programs.

No Catholic, in good conscience, could support such evil.

 

[markomalley]

I’m actually surprised that more employers haven’t owned up to dropping their employees’ health coverage. It appears that there is up to a $3,000 per employee per year fine that is assessed to companies who don’t provide coverage, but, according to the Kaiser Family Foundation 2010 health care survey, the average cost of single person coverage is over $5,000 per year. Doesn’t make business sense for any company to provide health coverage for their employees (starting in 2014).

An update:

The McKinsey Quarterly article was released for public viewing and can be seen here. The actual survey results (206 pp PDF) can be downloaded from here. The survey methodology can be reviewed here.

The conclusions published in the analysis piece (the first link above) show the following:

• Overall, 30 percent of employers will definitely or probably stop offering (employer-sponsored insurance) ESI in the years after 2014.
• Among employers with a high awareness of reform, this proportion increases to more than 50 percent, and upward of 60 percent will pursue some alternative to traditional ESI.
• At least 30 percent of employers would gain economically from dropping coverage even if they completely compensated employees for the change through other benefit offerings or higher salaries.
• Contrary to what many employers assume, more than 85 percent of employees would remain at their jobs even if their employer stopped offering ESI, although about 60 percent would expect increased compensation.

If you want to see the survey results that support those conclusions, go to the PDF file and review Q37 on page 142, Q39a on page 159, and Q41a on page 161…among other results.

So what? Obamacare provides taxpayer subsidies (called “affordability credits”) for taxpayers earning less than 400% of the poverty rate (defined as $88,000 per year for a family of 4) to bring the cost of insurance down to 11% of the family’s income. Those credits are paid for out of our tax dollars. That will radically increase the cost of Obamacare…blowing the CBO estimates of its cost ($88B per year for affordability credits as of 2019) out of the water.

Have fun with this Obamacare stuff y’all…

 

[Gift_from_God]

Not surprised considering Obama didn’t implement single-payer health care like they have in the UK or like we have in Canada.

The Canadians and the British on this forum will likely agree that no one gets denied health care because of the good system

 

[markomalley]

Not surprised considering Obama didn’t implement single-payer health care like they have in the UK or like we have in Canada.

The Canadians and the British on this forum will likely agree that no one gets denied health care because of the good system

As far as the British system, I see enough nightmares published in British papers on a regular basis where I question how good a system they have.

The Canadian papers seem to be a lot more discreet about the nightmares there.

But the British and Canadians do love their health care systems, I will grant you that. If a Yankee has the audacity to say anything about them, he’d better don his asbestos suit before uttering a word.

Me, I’d rather get rid of all health insurance altogether. Every last stinking bit of it for everybody.

 

[Dawnia]

How many of those companies that continue to provide insurance won’t make the employee pay a substantial portion of the premium? I’ve worked places that offer insurance, but don’t pay a penny towards coverage.

 

[SamH]

The most telling part of this report:

**says those who are keenly aware of the health-reform measure probably are more likely to consider an alternative to employer-sponsored plans, with 50% to 60% in this group expected to make a change **.

The more the employer knows about the plan the more likely they are to drop their own coverage. Expect that 30% number to rise as 2014 draws closer.

 

[SamH]

The Canadians and the British on this forum will likely agree that no one gets denied health care because of the good system

Are you aware that it is against the law to deny health care to anyone in the United States? Neither Canada or England has such a law.

 

[Scott_Lafrance]

Not surprised considering Obama didn’t implement single-payer health care like they have in the UK or like we have in Canada.

The Canadians and the British on this forum will likely agree that no one gets denied health care because of the good system

Britain and Canada may have a slight edge on primary care, but their specialty care is a well documented disaster, particularly in oncology.

 

[mary_bobo]

Britain and Canada may have a slight edge on primary care, but their specialty care is a well documented disaster, particularly in oncology.

I won’t go into the fiasco I ran into with my primary care physician in Canada and was near death for three weeks because of it. But I can’t give a thumbs-up about the care I received there.

 

[gamewell45]

From Marketwatch (a publication of the Dow Jones company…not a blog):
Once provisions of the Affordable Care Act start to kick in during 2014, at least three of every 10 employers will probably stop offering health coverage, a survey released Monday shows.

While only 7% of employees will be forced to switch to subsidized-exchange programs, at least 30% of companies say they will “definitely or probably” stop offering employer-sponsored coverage, according to the study published in McKinsey Quarterly.

The survey of 1,300 employers says those who are keenly aware of the health-reform measure probably are more likely to consider an alternative to employer-sponsored plans, with 50% to 60% in this group expected to make a change. It also found that for some, it makes more sense to switch. I’m actually surprised that more employers haven’t owned up to dropping their employees’ health coverage. It appears that there is up to a $3,000 per employee per year fine that is assessed to companies who don’t provide coverage, but, according to the Kaiser Family Foundation 2010 health care survey, the average cost of single person coverage is over $5,000 per year. Doesn’t make business sense for any company to provide health coverage for their employees (starting in 2014).

Those companies who drop medical insurance for their employees could risk unionization of the workplace.

 

[Gift_from_God]

Are you aware that it is against the law to deny health care to anyone in the United States? Neither Canada or England has such a law.

Then why do people in the States get denied coverage? Up here, we find that unacceptable

 

[markomalley]

Those companies who drop medical insurance for their employees could risk unionization of the workplace.

And that is going to do what, exactly?

Suppose the company determines that they would not want to negotiate health benefits into the union contract…what’s the union going to do? Strike? Perhaps the company will go under unless they dump employees’ health care…

Suppose the company in question determines that they want to provide health coverage, but all of the company’s competitors don’t. Are customers going to flock to that company and pay higher prices because that company provides health coverage for employees?

I don’t know about anybody else, but if I was a business owner and I was threatened by my employees unless I took a course of action…I’d close the business before succumbing to that threat.