Skip to main content

View Diary: Is the employer mandate that easy to avoid? (36 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  I think they do (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Lujane, cynndara

    because the part the employer's pay is part of the employee's compensation.

    Part-time workers who buy their own health insurance don't get the tax advantages that an employer gets.

    You may be right about single payer.

    I'm in favor of portable health insurance. If people who start a new job were not obliged to sign up  with the employer's plan, employer sponsored health insurance would get better in a hurry.

    And likewise, when employees can choose some other insurance plan, when there's no tax advantage for the employer we might see some real competition.

    •  A tax deduction is not the same ... (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Lujane, debedb

      as a tax credit.  A deduction only returns a percentage of the cost of a deduction to your pocket.  A credit effectively rebates 100% of the cost.

      And neither a public option nor single payer will have any impact on the swiftly growing cost of medical care.  The only way to impact that is to regulate its costs, but doing so will only drive care providers and device manufacturers into different markets.

      "Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity, and I am not sure about the universe." -- Albert Einstein

      by Neuroptimalian on Sun Nov 11, 2012 at 01:40:53 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  What different markets? (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        LilithGardener

        Providers don't make money if they don't sell their services.  A single-payer plan creates a monopoly at the buyers' end, enforcing price controls on a provider market that currently holds all the pricing power and behaves with a combination of professional arrogance and profiteering capitalism.  A public option leads to a single payer, as a public provider will quickly out-compete private-sector plans that siphon 20% of their receipts into executive salaries and stockholder dividends.

        Given that Einstein is correct however, it's no wonder that the U.S. has been unwilling to adopt either public option or single-payer for the last fifty years.

    •  medicare for all is the most portable with the (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      LilithGardener, cynndara, debedb

      least paperwork.

      •  And people can buy some other policy if (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        nuclear winter solstice, debedb

        they want to. I hate this idea that you have to buy your employer's chosen policy, or your spouse's employer's policy and those are you only options.

        No other insurance is marketed to a captive market that way.

        •  Not only that, but if you are sick or hurt, how do (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          LilithGardener, cynndara

          you pay the premiums? Seems like employers should be forced to cover it for you until you are back on your feet...It's attachment to the job in the first place that is wrong. And as I understand it, the history says that the only reason connecting the two is from wage freezes that required employers to find some other way to entice workers to their factories. Not so enticing anymore- actually it's enslaving, since it's the thing that forced my hubby out of his small business and into working for the man again. Good thing, too, since he finally got a full physical and then had an emergency appendectomy.

          •  The history (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            nuclear winter solstice

            in this country.  In Germany, where employer-paid insurance is virtually universal, it was mandated by law under Kaiser Wilhelm as one of many reforms to stave off a Socialist revolution.  Companies in Germany don't play these games of cutting hours and hiring full-time workers as "part-time" or "independent contractors" in order to avoid paying health insurance, and provider costs are better regulated as well.  The benefits of a powerful and patriarchal state that has no qualms about using its powers.

    •  er, what? (0+ / 0-)
      because the part the employer's pay is part of the employee's compensation.
      Huh?
      •  Employee compensation (0+ / 0-)

        includes wages and benefits, such as health insurance, and retirement savings plans, etc..

        If the employer is paying any portion of the premium on the health insurance policy that's still a valuable compensation for the employee. It's just not allocated on an hourly basis.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site