You should read this

[i_am_the_swammi]

So these companies have been providing health insurance to their employees all these years to reel in (or keep) valued employees. I believe that.

 

I'm not sure if youe being sarcastic or not....but I can with certainty say that some hotels I have worked for have lost great talent in the past because a competitor offered a much better benefits package.

 

And to your second question: the costs they currently endure don't have to go up. The main math equation their bean counters are toiling with is: do the costs to insure each employee significantly outweigh the government penalties if they don't? Those costs to insure include the emploer portion, admin costs, etc.

 

As an employee, I don't know if I'd object to my employer coming to me and saying "We're no longer providing your insurance. We currntly pay $1500 per month, you co-pay $300. Instead, you'll be getting $1000 extra in your paycheck for you to do with as you please. That's a net of $1300 to you to shop for your own insurance. You can contact a variety of carriers, and custom-pick your own plan versus being forced to pay for our rigid company plan. For us, it menas we can now better-budget the company on fixed costs, rather than be at the whim of insurance companies continually raising our rates. It should be a win-win for everyone.

[SayItAintSoJoe]

So these companies have been providing health insurance to their employees all these years to reel in (or keep) valued employees. I believe that.

 

I'm not sure if youe being sarcastic or not....but I can with certainty say that some hotels I have worked for have lost great talent in the past because a competitor offered a much better benefits package.

 

Not being sarcastic at all. That's why I put the words "I believe that" at the end of the statement.

 

I currently work for myself and get my health insurance coverage through my wife's employer. However, at my previous job I was recruited by the company. One of the questions I asked them while they were trying to get me on board was regarding their employee health insurance package. Had they come back and said we don't provide health insurance and we basically pay the same wage as other companies that do I would have hung up the phone on them.

[Perchoutofwater]

Both the left and the right lie and mislead. Don't even begin to think that one side is better than the other. You may try and cast this as an evil plot by one side or the other because you are a proponent of the opposite side, but the simple fact of the matter is, our leaders do what they do, not because it is best for the American people but because it is the best for those that have put them in power. And I've got news for you, it isn't the American people that put them in power.

 

Franklin had it right when he said "When the people find that they can vote themselves money, that will herald the end of the republic."

 

FDR started the handout programs that ushered this in, and with very few exceptions each administration since has made it worse.

[bushwacked]

Has anyone ever heard the saying that "When the people find that they can vote themselves money, that will herald the end of the republic?"

[CaP'N GRuNGe]

I'm not sure if youe being sarcastic or not....but I can with certainty say that some hotels I have worked for have lost great talent in the past because a competitor offered a much better benefits package.

 

And to your second question: the costs they currently endure don't have to go up. The main math equation their bean counters are toiling with is: do the costs to insure each employee significantly outweigh the government penalties if they don't? Those costs to insure include the emploer portion, admin costs, etc.

 

As an employee, I don't know if I'd object to my employer coming to me and saying "We're no longer providing your insurance. We currntly pay $1500 per month, you co-pay $300. Instead, you'll be getting $1000 extra in your paycheck for you to do with as you please. That's a net of $1300 to you to shop for your own insurance. You can contact a variety of carriers, and custom-pick your own plan versus being forced to pay for our rigid company plan. For us, it menas we can now better-budget the company on fixed costs, rather than be at the whim of insurance companies continually raising our rates. It should be a win-win for everyone.

 

Just remember that extra $1,300 of take home pay is now taxable income. Let's use 25% as the fed tax bracket for sake of argument. And then there's state income tax too which can vary. I'll use 5% just for the example.

 

So now you need to replace insurance that cost $1,800 a month with a plan that costs say ($1,300*70%) = $910 just to break even.

[tosberg34]

Just remember that extra $1,300 of take home pay is now taxable income. Let's use 25% as the fed tax bracket for sake of argument. And then there's state income tax too which can vary. I'll use 5% just for the example.

 

So now you need to replace insurance that cost $1,800 a month with a plan that costs say ($1,300*70%) = $910 just to break even.

 

And on top of that, what happens when your insruance premium goes up? Because it will - don't be fooled by the ObamaCare lies. Those costs have to come from somewhere and it's either in more taxes and/or higher premiums. You won't always be paying $1300 premiums. So your employer continues to give you $1000 and now your insurance shoots to $2000. Now what? You employer is only in it for the one time cost and they don't have to worry about the increases anymore - but you do. At some point your premiums are going to be higher than whatever your paying now with private insurance.

Edited May 7, 2010 by tosberg34

[Kid Cid]

And on top of that, what happens when your insruance premium goes up? Because it will - don't be fooled by the ObamaCare lies. Those costs have to come from somewhere and it's either in more taxes and/or higher premiums. You won't always be paying $1300 premiums. So your employer continues to give you $1000 and now your insurance shoots to $2000. Now what? You employer is only in it for the one time cost and they don't have to worry about the increases anymore - but you do. At some point your premiums are going to be higher than whatever your paying now with private insurance.

There is a line of thought that thinks that maybe, just maybe, you should be aware of the increases in your health care costs.

[i_am_the_swammi]

Just remember that extra $1,300 of take home pay is now taxable income. Let's use 25% as the fed tax bracket for sake of argument. And then there's state income tax too which can vary. I'll use 5% just for the example.

 

So now you need to replace insurance that cost $1,800 a month with a plan that costs say ($1,300*70%) = $910 just to break even.

 

incorrect. Any funds used for health care are tax deductible.

[i_am_the_swammi]

And on top of that, what happens when your insruance premium goes up? Because it will - don't be fooled by the ObamaCare lies. Those costs have to come from somewhere and it's either in more taxes and/or higher premiums. You won't always be paying $1300 premiums. So your employer continues to give you $1000 and now your insurance shoots to $2000. Now what? You employer is only in it for the one time cost and they don't have to worry about the increases anymore - but you do. At some point your premiums are going to be higher than whatever your paying now with private insurance.

 

Not really. Under your current employer-sponsored plan, if their premiums go up, it likely means two things: (1) you are getting less of a raise, if any, because the employer is paying more, and/or (2) as has happened in the past, the employer passed along that increase to the employee in the form a higher co-pay. This was the case time and time again when the insurance premiums were going up by double-digits a couple years ago.

 

You already pay more(or make less) if the costs go up....this will be the case in any scenario.

[tosberg34]

Not really. Under your current employer-sponsored plan, if their premiums go up, it likely means two things: (1) you are getting less of a raise, if any, because the employer is paying more, and/or (2) as has happened in the past, the employer passed along that increase to the employee in the form a higher co-pay. This was the case time and time again when the insurance premiums were going up by double-digits a couple years ago.

 

You already pay more(or make less) if the costs go up....this will be the case in any scenario.

 

This time you alone are going to eat the entire cost of that premium increase instead of you AND the employer sharing it. And let's not forget to mention the much poorer quality care you're going to get (if you can even get in to see a Dr) on top of that.

Edited May 8, 2010 by tosberg34

[wiegie]

something you have to take into account is that getting medical insurance as an individual instead of being part of a large group is MUCH more expensive if you are even allowed to get it. As part of a large group, insurers will accept you since whatever your costs are will be spread out among all employees. When you are an individual, you better not have any pre-existing conditions or be in less than stellar health or they will not let you get insurance even though it may be twice as expensive.

 

It is a HUGE difference coming to an insurance company as an individual than as part of a huge company. You save a ton of money just being part of that big company.

I'll note that this is the major reason why individuals are being mandated to by health insurance--it forces everyone into a pool.

[i_am_the_swammi]

I'll note that this is the major reason why individuals are being mandated to by health insurance--it forces everyone into a pool.

 

Correct.

 

Any DMD, you are, basically, dead wrong on the costs. When I was self-employed, I was able to insure my family thru Aetna for $950 per month on a solid individual plan. When I joined my employer, I had one choice: to go on their cadillac plan, which was $1800 per month (they paid $1500, I paid $300). While the plan was completely comprehensive, and office visits $5 lower, it had stuff I didn't want, and shouldn't have had to pay for. No one in my family needs inpatient mental health, 90 chiro visits a year, pregnancy coverage....all of which jacked up my costs, with me having no option other than to pay it.

 

When you are an individual, you better not have any pre-existing conditions or be in less than stellar health or they will not let you get insurance even though it may be twice as expensive.

 

this is just flat out wrong. I had no problem getting insurance with a history of back problems.

 

Oh, and tosberg....please post a link that confirms the quality of care I will recieve will go down significantly. TIA.

[bushwacked]

It is a HUGE difference coming to an insurance company as an individual than as part of a huge company. You save a ton of money just being part of that big company.

 

This sounds like a sales pitch for Obamacare.

[westvirginia]

incorrect. Any funds used for health care are tax deductible.

 

Since when? Unless obamessiahcare changed this then it's not the case.

[tosberg34]

Oh, and tosberg....please post a link that confirms the quality of care I will recieve will go down significantly. TIA.

 

We'll see how smarmy you are in about 5 years or so when the real effects of your Obmessiah's HCR plan start to manifest themselves. Until then, you'll just have to wait for that link - but by then it will be too late.

 

We all lose on this one.

[CaP'N GRuNGe]

incorrect. Any funds used for health care are tax deductible.

 

Not under current law they aren't.

[SEC=UGA]

I've said it before and I'll say it again; I am contemplating the same thing as the aforementioned companies. From the research I've done so far I can save about 250K a year by paying the fines. I'll keep you posted.

[bpwallace49]

We'll see how smarmy you are in about 5 years or so when the real effects of your Obmessiah's HCR plan start to manifest themselves. Until then, you'll just have to wait for that link - but by then it will be too late.

 

We all lose on this one.

 

Soo . . no link on that one? Why do you attack the messenger and ignore the message? Typical . . . all talk, no walk . .

 

[Pope Flick]

Not under current law they aren't.

 

 

Wow - everyone's wrong on this one. Before the reform passed, you could deduct all medical expenses exceeding 7.5 % of your annual gross income. After the bill passed it was raised to 10%. So it's been there, but it has always been capped by the 7.5 and now 10 percent rule. Pretty simple.

[tosberg34]

Soo . . no link on that one? Why do you attack the messenger and ignore the message? Typical . . . all talk, no walk . .

 

 

Apparently you didn't read my post very well, but what's ironic is you attacking the messenger for attacking the messenger. I don't see you railing on Bushwacked or evil_gop_liars for their drive-by posts, yet you're on anyone that doesn't share your Socialist vision of the world.

 

Don't ever change, BP. Your hypocrisy and double-standards knows no bounds. Keep up the fight, comrade.

Edited May 9, 2010 by tosberg34

[bpwallace49]

Apparently you didn't read my post very well, but what's ironic is you attacking the messenger for attacking the messenger. I don't see you railing on Bushwacked or evil_gop_liars for their drive-by posts, yet you're on anyone that doesn't share your Socialist vision of the world.

 

Don't ever change, BP. Your hypocrisy and double-standards knows no bounds. Keep up the fight, comrade.

 

Wow . . Swammi asked for a link so you cna back up an assertion by YOU . . and you refuse to do so? How completely typical of a tosberg response . . .

[SEC=UGA]

Wow - everyone's wrong on this one. Before the reform passed, you could deduct all medical expenses exceeding 7.5 % of your annual gross income. After the bill passed it was raised to 10%. So it's been there, but it has always been capped by the 7.5 and now 10 percent rule. Pretty simple.

 

The way I read the post about the deductibility was that it was reference into health ins. premiums, which are not deductible by individuals.

[tosberg34]

Wow . . Swammi asked for a link so you cna back up an assertion by YOU . . and you refuse to do so? How completely typical of a tosberg response . . .

 

Listen, BP, I can't help you if you don't want to help yourself. Continue to ignore my post if you want, but it won't change my answer.

[bushwacked]

Apparently you didn't read my post very well, but what's ironic is you attacking the messenger for attacking the messenger. I don't see you railing on Bushwacked or evil_gop_liars for their drive-by posts, yet you're on anyone that doesn't share your Socialist vision of the world.

 

Don't ever change, BP. Your hypocrisy and double-standards knows no bounds. Keep up the fight, comrade.

 

You're clearly the victim, under these particular circumstances.

[tosberg34]

You're clearly the victim, under these particular circumstances.

 

Then we can stand in solidarity, Comrade Bushwacked.

Edited May 9, 2010 by tosberg34