Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Hillary's health plan will lead many businesses to dump their plans for the government plan

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
Herman Munster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-20-07 05:52 PM
Original message
Hillary's health plan will lead many businesses to dump their plans for the government plan
This is the back-door way to single-payer. For most big businesses, it will be simple dollars and cents. If the government offers health care cheaper than the private sector, they will cancel their private plans and offer all their employees the government plan. Over time, unless the insurance industry can compete on cost with the government plan, they will cease to exist.

"Business will have a new set of choices," she said. They'll be able to drop their own plans and opt into the federal system. "I think it would make economic sense for a number of them," she added, "because ... they'll be in a bigger pool and they won't have to pay for the administrative costs they now have." That's a big change for the Clintonistas: back in 1993, they railed against an individual mandate because it would encourage businesses to dump their employee plans.

http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1663644-2,00.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
whistle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-20-07 05:54 PM
Response to Original message
1. Just place everyone on medicare and have all businesses and workers
...pay in like they do now
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cleita Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-20-07 05:57 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. That's what all of us are going for. I don't understand the
need for this byzantine way of going about it. Edward's plan was clearer in it's intent, but I prefer Kucinich's plan.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Herman Munster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-20-07 05:59 PM
Response to Reply #2
3. it's really
about tricking enough idiot conservatives into accepting a friendly market based solution that has a trojan horse in it. If insurance companies can't compete on price with the government, the market will force them out of business.

It's the only politically feasible way to get single-payer eventually.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pnwmom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-20-07 06:05 PM
Response to Reply #3
5. I think you've nailed it. It's the "politically feasible way to get single-payer
eventually."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Capn Sunshine Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-20-07 07:00 PM
Response to Reply #1
9. A-MEN
Geese, how hard is this? We have to do this NOW , no matter wahtthe insurance industry says. The days of ten companies making 600 million a year profit off of us are coming to a close.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
depakid Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-20-07 06:01 PM
Response to Original message
4. That's simplistic "free market" thought
which doesn't bear on the realities of health economics. One of those realities is adverse selection, which means that the private plans will cherry pick from the healthier people and the government plan will get stuck "insuring" those who'll cost the systems many times more.

More profits for insurers, more burden and expense for the government- and ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to contain costs or take administrative waste out of the system. Like the Massachusetts "plan" it's a boodoggle that may well make matters worse.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pnwmom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-20-07 06:07 PM
Response to Reply #4
6. Businesses can't cherry pick among their employees.
Either they'll offer insurance, or they won't -- but they won't be able to send only their more expensive employees to the govt. plans.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
antigop Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-20-07 06:50 PM
Response to Reply #6
8. No, they can't cherry pick, but there will still be adverse selection
Edited on Thu Sep-20-07 07:05 PM by antigop
The companies will go (if they haven't already) to high deductible plans with health savings accounts. (These happen to be more profitable for the insurance companies than the normal comprehensive plans because the deductibles are so high.) Younger, healthier people will opt for the company high-deductible plans because they think they won't get sick. It's also a way for the insurance companies to keep the premium costs down because the high-deductible plans are less than the comprehensive policies.

The less healthy will go with a government plan -- leaving the government plan with the less healthy employees.

I can't believe people are falling for this. It's the SAME argument against the GOP's push for high-deductible policies with HSAs (health savings accounts).

Yes, it's adverse selection. And the insurance companies win.


<edit to add> And people are falling for this... unbelievable.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DURHAM D Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-20-07 06:28 PM
Response to Original message
7. Thanks for your post. I know that as a small business owner
I will be out the back door and over to the government's front door asking to get into their program in a heart beat if I can. Right now I have cobbled together a way to insure every employee. But I can't add staff because I can not afford to pay any more in medical insurance premiums. I could pay/handle more payroll but not the benefits so I do without new employees. I could also hire more staff and ask the long time employees to pick up part of their insurance costs but I don't want to do that.

To handle my staffing problem I just work longer and longer hours. I am getting near retirement and could, in fact, go ahead and retire now. However, I keep working so my staff has health insurance. My two most loyal and long time employees are diabetic. If I shut my business down I know they will have a hard time because of their pre-existing conditions.

Note: If I find someone who is covered by their spouses or their own medical plan I would hire them in a minute. This relates to Hillary's quote that Drudge and the New York Post got wrong.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu May 09th 2024, 03:20 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC