Will you be a 'socialist' on the day that 'earning' your health insurance is not enough?

[rebeccajo 14]

Eroding health coverage

A NEW AARP SURVEY of 407 employers in Washington found ominous signs that workers may have to contribute more to keep their health-insurance coverage. Among the findings:

Cost sharing: Nearly half of the companies said they now pay 100 percent of the insurance premiums. An additional 26 percent pick up at least three-quarters of the costs, and 12 percent cover at least 51 percent of the premiums.

Coping plan: If current cost trends continue, 29 percent of the employers said, it's extremely or very likely they will raise workers' share of premiums in the next three years. Twenty-five percent said they will increase deductibles.

Terminating coverage: If health-care costs were to rise 10 percent above current levels, 14 percent of firms said they would drop health coverage. If costs rose 15 percent higher, 27 percent would do so. If costs rose 25 percent, four in 10 employers said they would stop providing coverage.

Source: AARP Survey of Washington Businesses about the Future of Employee Health Care Benefits.

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/heal...surance23m.html

[Jenn! 918]

We recently got word that they are changing the structure of our health insurance. Currently we pay a small portion of our premiums and supposedly this change could either increase or decrease our contributions depending on whether we select a deductible (currently there are no deductibles). I have no doubt that I am going to end up paying more to maintain my current level of coverage. They haven't told us the details yet and I'm very interested in how it's all going to work. I work for GE - seeing as it's such a large employer, I wouldn't be surprised if other companies are planning something similar in the near future.

[alienlovechild 75]

Terminating coverage: If health-care costs were to rise 10 percent above current levels, 14 percent of firms said they would drop health coverage. If costs rose 15 percent higher, 27 percent would do so. If costs rose 25 percent, four in 10 employers said they would stop providing coverage.

So Obama is promising us we can keep our private healthcare until his plan wipes some of them out as viable alternatives?

"According to the Post, under the Obamacare legislation written by Democrats, Obama's promise that you can keep your healthcare plan "would not necessarily be true."

The Democrats' Obamacare legislation could cause some employers to drop coverage.

That conclusion is based in part on estimates by the Congressional Budget Office and staff of the Joint Committee on Taxation that in 2016, about three million people (including spouses and dependents of workers) who are covered by an employer-provided plan "would not have an offer of coverage" under Obamacare."

http://www.examiner.com/x-268-Right-Side-P...healthcare-plan

[rebeccajo 14]

Stick to the topic, ALC. Stop deflecting.

[rebeccajo 14]

Wow.

Talk about crickets.

[luckytxn 2,264]

Terminating coverage: If health-care costs were to rise 10 percent above current levels, 14 percent of firms said they would drop health coverage. If costs rose 15 percent higher, 27 percent would do so. If costs rose 25 percent, four in 10 employers said they would stop providing coverage.

So Obama is promising us we can keep our private healthcare until his plan wipes some of them out as viable alternatives?

"According to the Post, under the Obamacare legislation written by Democrats, Obama's promise that you can keep your healthcare plan "would not necessarily be true."

The Democrats' Obamacare legislation could cause some employers to drop coverage.

That conclusion is based in part on estimates by the Congressional Budget Office and staff of the Joint Committee on Taxation that in 2016, about three million people (including spouses and dependents of workers) who are covered by an employer-provided plan "would not have an offer of coverage" under Obamacare."

http://www.examiner.com/x-268-Right-Side-P...healthcare-plan

Just think how much more the premiums will be when the Socialists mandate that no one can be denied with a preexisting condition or the other mandates that will bring the cost of each up. This will be an indirect tax by the way as each in the plans will now have to shoulder the burden of the increased costs across the board.

[natty bumppo 297]

Terminating coverage: If health-care costs were to rise 10 percent above current levels, 14 percent of firms said they would drop health coverage. If costs rose 15 percent higher, 27 percent would do so. If costs rose 25 percent, four in 10 employers said they would stop providing coverage.

this is exactly what my previous employer did to my UK co-workers. their private coverage was terminated ...

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

Eroding health coverage

A NEW AARP SURVEY of 407 employers in Washington found ominous signs that workers may have to contribute more to keep their health-insurance coverage. Among the findings:

Cost sharing: Nearly half of the companies said they now pay 100 percent of the insurance premiums. An additional 26 percent pick up at least three-quarters of the costs, and 12 percent cover at least 51 percent of the premiums.

Coping plan: If current cost trends continue, 29 percent of the employers said, it's extremely or very likely they will raise workers' share of premiums in the next three years. Twenty-five percent said they will increase deductibles.

Terminating coverage: If health-care costs were to rise 10 percent above current levels, 14 percent of firms said they would drop health coverage. If costs rose 15 percent higher, 27 percent would do so. If costs rose 25 percent, four in 10 employers said they would stop providing coverage.

Source: AARP Survey of Washington Businesses about the Future of Employee Health Care Benefits.

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/heal...surance23m.html

Why is it so wrong for employees to have to pay for all or some of their own coverage?

Health care is an expensive service to deliver.

[rebeccajo 14]

Terminating coverage: If health-care costs were to rise 10 percent above current levels, 14 percent of firms said they would drop health coverage. If costs rose 15 percent higher, 27 percent would do so. If costs rose 25 percent, four in 10 employers said they would stop providing coverage.

this is exactly what my previous employer did to my UK co-workers. their private coverage was terminated ...

So what makes you think your previous employer might not eventually do the same to its US workers?

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

So what makes you think your previous employer might not eventually do the same to its US workers?

What if they did? Health care is expensive and getting more so every year. If we decide that going forward no employee of any company will have to shoulder the burden of added costs, who does that leave?

[rebeccajo 14]

Terminating coverage: If health-care costs were to rise 10 percent above current levels, 14 percent of firms said they would drop health coverage. If costs rose 15 percent higher, 27 percent would do so. If costs rose 25 percent, four in 10 employers said they would stop providing coverage.

So Obama is promising us we can keep our private healthcare until his plan wipes some of them out as viable alternatives?

"According to the Post, under the Obamacare legislation written by Democrats, Obama's promise that you can keep your healthcare plan "would not necessarily be true."

The Democrats' Obamacare legislation could cause some employers to drop coverage.

That conclusion is based in part on estimates by the Congressional Budget Office and staff of the Joint Committee on Taxation that in 2016, about three million people (including spouses and dependents of workers) who are covered by an employer-provided plan "would not have an offer of coverage" under Obamacare."

http://www.examiner.com/x-268-Right-Side-P...healthcare-plan

Just think how much more the premiums will be when the Socialists mandate that no one can be denied with a preexisting condition or the other mandates that will bring the cost of each up. This will be an indirect tax by the way as each in the plans will now have to shoulder the burden of the increased costs across the board.

Oh really?

I thought a tax was something that went into government coffers.

If you are paying part (or all) of your premium to a private insurance company, that's going into the bank of a corporation. And that's capitalism and capitalism is good for America.

So what makes you think your previous employer might not eventually do the same to its US workers?

What if they did? Health care is expensive and getting more so every year. If we decide that going forward no employee of any company will have to shoulder the burden of added costs, who does that leave?

You tell me.

Why is it so wrong for employees to have to pay for all or some of their own coverage?

Health care is an expensive service to deliver.

It sure is. Getting harder and harder everyday for employers to subsidize their workers.

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

So what makes you think your previous employer might not eventually do the same to its US workers?

What if they did? Health care is expensive and getting more so every year. If we decide that going forward no employee of any company will have to shoulder the burden of added costs, who does that leave?

You tell me.

Not much of anybody. Health care costs are rising, that's the problem. That employers are pushing more of the cost to their employees isn't the problem, that's a symptom.

[natty bumppo 297]

Terminating coverage: If health-care costs were to rise 10 percent above current levels, 14 percent of firms said they would drop health coverage. If costs rose 15 percent higher, 27 percent would do so. If costs rose 25 percent, four in 10 employers said they would stop providing coverage.

this is exactly what my previous employer did to my UK co-workers. their private coverage was terminated ...

So what makes you think your previous employer might not eventually do the same to its US workers?

if they could save a buck and dump people onto another system like the UK folks ...

[rebeccajo 14]

Terminating coverage: If health-care costs were to rise 10 percent above current levels, 14 percent of firms said they would drop health coverage. If costs rose 15 percent higher, 27 percent would do so. If costs rose 25 percent, four in 10 employers said they would stop providing coverage.

this is exactly what my previous employer did to my UK co-workers. their private coverage was terminated ...

So what makes you think your previous employer might not eventually do the same to its US workers?

if they could save a buck and dump people onto another system like the UK folks ...

What if there is no other system? What if the 'system' is purchasing health insurance on the marketplace as it is presently in operation?

So what makes you think your previous employer might not eventually do the same to its US workers?

What if they did? Health care is expensive and getting more so every year. If we decide that going forward no employee of any company will have to shoulder the burden of added costs, who does that leave?

You tell me.

Not much of anybody. Health care costs are rising, that's the problem. That employers are pushing more of the cost to their employees isn't the problem, that's a symptom.

Now you're catching on.

[natty bumppo 297]

Terminating coverage: If health-care costs were to rise 10 percent above current levels, 14 percent of firms said they would drop health coverage. If costs rose 15 percent higher, 27 percent would do so. If costs rose 25 percent, four in 10 employers said they would stop providing coverage.

this is exactly what my previous employer did to my UK co-workers. their private coverage was terminated ...

So what makes you think your previous employer might not eventually do the same to its US workers?

if they could save a buck and dump people onto another system like the UK folks ...

What if there is no other system? What if the 'system' is purchasing health insurance on the marketplace as it is presently in operation?

this was an intentional cost saving .... the company was paying for two health cares ... one went bye-bye ....

Edited August 18, 2009 by Natty Bumppo