Reply With Quote
Fine, find an article about the coming jobs boom from Obamacare and rebut.
Heck, the royal butthurt on Freedomworks last tuesday night was probably a sight to behold, tbh
Fine, find an article about the coming jobs boom from Obamacare and rebut.
We just completed CCHIT certification on our system... more work created there. The new exchanges create jobs too.
Not going to hear that from Freedomworks.
Well, you're hearing it first hand here...
If anything, let's see what employment numbers look like in 2014 or whenever the law actually gets fully implemented.
I sell health insurance to companies.
Obamacare makes them cover their employees with health insurance or pay a fine.
Of COURSE my business is growing!
Surprised we got this far, but Obamacare is a Republican idea after all.
Rumor has it that my company is just preparing to pay the fines and will make employees buy their own insurance.
Rumor though, so who knows.
Company has 11,000 employees btw.
America's health care system is deeply, widely ed up, duh!
It's going to take deep and wide, and painful, adjustments to fix it.
Repugs, in 100% bad faith, and the health care system will all the way, and will try to kill ACA at every step.
Socialized industrial countries not owned and operated by their corporations have been working hard for decades on their universal health systems. Even then it's horribly complex job.
Randian, greedy, " all y'all-I got mine", "Christian" America ed by its health system will be extremely difficult to fix, will take decades.
ACA will be right up there with landmarks in the PROGRESS of American civilization.
Way to go 101A.Thanks for that.
http://auburnpub.com/news/opinion/co...3136d3269.html
http://www.syracuse.com/news/index.s..._health_c.html
I wonder how much the take-home pay for these CEOs is each year? *shrug*
Are the ACA fines tax deductible? employer's cost of group insurance is.
I'm under 50 employees and may go the opposite direction. I may just give my guys raises and let Obama pay for their insurance instead of me paying for it.
Most of my guys make about 50K gross a year, so after deductions Obama will pay for most of their health insurance.
And that's your right and it's fine... I personally think that if Obamacare works as a tool to splinter health insurance from employer payroll, then on that specific aspect, it's a positive step.
When people finally realize how much more Obamacare is going to cost than has been projected they are not going to be happy. Just my one little company will be a $90,000 hickey they weren't expecting.
The more ACA hurts, the bigger the groundswell for a hardcore public insurance option for all.
25% of health care dollars go to overhead that has no effect on care.
If health care gets more efficient and costs less, one would expect job losses. The few people who lose their jobs would be more than offset by the fact that healthcare for everybody else got cheaper.
Knowing this, though, requires a familiarity with economics, something that seems to escape conservative confirmation biases.
Or at least will make people more aware of the price gouging going on...
"healthcare for everybody else got cheaper"
health CARE won't get cheaper, but health INSURANCE could be.
I'm all for govt-trained and -salaried docs + nurses in govt-owned facilities operating on salaries, not fee-for-service, and NON-PROFIT. It's way past time for Human-Americans to back at the greedy, gouging for-profit medical business.
We disagree.
Employer provided health insurance used to be a tool, as other benefits are, as en incentive to get good employees. It doesn't surprise me that your lowest common denominator at ude feels compe ion should be extinguished.
Are you suggesting it will get more efficient with Obama's expanding bureaucracy?
Unfortunately, the ACA does nothing to reduce the actual cost of healthcare; in fact by mandating minimum coverages that are higher than previous, it makes it more expensive. Add in the addl. regs it brought to bear, and it certainly doesn't do anything to decrease that 25% you talk about.
Bouton's idea above about Govt. owned not-for-profit hospitals and clinics, with salaried providers could potentially reduce costs. Not sure how he proposes to get the docs to work there, however.
Salaries. Plain and simple. High enough to attract people.
If you can get doctors who don't base their pay on the number of procedures they perform, that would go a LOOOONG way, IMO.
Pretty perverse incentive, and VERY obvious place to start.
It's still a tool for those that want to provide it...
The reality, however, is that it puts the company between you and care. It insulated employees from the realities of healthcare cost and in some cases caused them to be actually underinsured.
What does "lowest common denominator at ude" even means?
What compe ion gets extinguished? As a matter of fact, you get more people individually purchasing insurance, which should actually foster compe ion (you're adding demand).
If you would have actually thought it through, you would have brought up that it might increase cost due to the individual underwriting and overhead.
I'll chalk this comment up to one other instance where you didn't think before posting.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
