Skip to main content

View Diary: This is why we must pull their coverage (293 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Employer provided insurance... (6+ / 0-) a huge chunk of what makes our companies non-competitive in expanded world markets. Other countries (including ALL other industrialized countries) provide basic health care to all citizens, it is not an onus put on employers that of course must cut into both the number of employees they can hire and how much they can pay those employees.

    Government single-payer is the only competitive solution.

    •  Even worse... (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      antirove, Kickemout, Cassandra Waites that tying health insurance coverage to employment excludes those who work part-time or seasonal jobs, those who live in regions where work is iffy at best and not long-term even when it's available, etc. A form of indentured servitude if a family member must have coverage - the worker is not free to move horizontally or vertically in his/her career, but is stuck without that freedom.

      •  Your last point explains something which has (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Joy Busey

        puzzled me for years. Namely that for large companies at least the cost of maintaining health insurance programs must be onerous, especially if one includes all the HR costs related to them.

        But you last point explains why many will not get behind a national health insurance program. Namely that it gives the companies some perceived leverage over the employees.

        "The fact which the politician faces is merely that there is less honor among thieves than was supposed, and not the fact that they are thieves." Thoreau

        by shigeru on Thu Mar 06, 2008 at 01:29:54 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site