re: 80%-90% of employer-provided insurance will disappear as ObamaCare takes hold

quote:

---

Is government forcing these companies to disappear employer provided health insurance, or are employers choosing not to provide it?

---

Government is making it significantly more expensive to do so. Businesses don't make those decisions in a vaccuum.

Ask yourself this: why would businesses choose to offer that benefit now but not offer it in the future? Something must be happening to change the calculus.

As far as "more choice", that's a flat out lie. You used to have more options--getting it from work, or buying in the individual market. As a direct result of the ACA, the former option will be lost. Meanwhile, there are far fewer options in the individual market.

Some of us have been saying this for 5 years now. It's just common sense. It's like the domino effect. One of the main reasons employers offer insurance now is to be competitive. When the competition starts dumping their employees on the complete clusterf*ck that is OdummyCare, others will follow as their employees will have nowhere else to "go" for employment that offers insurance.

Of course, once insurance is no longer with employers, and ObozoCare implodes, the lefts "only solution" will be full blown socialize medicine ... or, as they've come to call it to make it seem less STUPID, single payer.

quote:

---

Given the thread title, why not?

---

The tax penalty!

quote:

---

forced into Obmacare with less choices and something I don't want.

---

C'mon - I'll bet your current insurance doesn't pay for your operation to change into a female.

see?

it's all worth it.

[but we may have to cut back on covering cancer and stuff.]

And if employers do increase salaries to compensate, guess what ? That's now taxable income so more revenue for the gov't. Easier for them to do it that way than just come out and tax benefits you receive.

I've already informed our employees that they will be paying taxes on their "Cadillac plan". We could get shittier obamacare,but I'd be 35% MORE!! Anybody that supports this flaming shitpile is a gotdamn moron and don't have a fricking clue how bad it is. IF left unchanged.

My brother's company looking to offer an option where they pay into accounts for employees to use to pay for their healthcare/insurance as they please. This is something that is feasible due to the exchanges. Normally they provide 80% of the costs for a HMO plan.

Its good for him because he is a consultant so he works a lot for a while at some remote location, then takes time off to spend with the family and to work on restoring old cars. He won't have to worry about losing his insurance benefits on extended breaks.

quote:

---

My brother's company looking to offer an option where they pay into accounts for employees to use to pay for their healthcare/insurance as they please. This is something that is feasible due to the exchanges. Normally they provide 80% of the costs for a HMO plan.

Its good for him because he is a consultant

---

JIMHO but you might want to suggest your brother take one more looksee at the Obamacare penalty his plan could entail. Unless he'd like to burn $36,000.00/employee in fines. LINK.

quote:

---

Thank God. Why should health insurance be tied to one's employer?

---

Its not, you can happily buy insurance on your own and you could do this pre-obamacare


Insurance is a benefit offered by employers in order to retain better talent, when they are saddled with higher costs, they will drop people onto the exchanges and pay the govt the cost of that benefit instead of giving it directly to their employees.

quote:

---

Insurance is a benefit offered by employers in order to retain better talent

---

Historically d/t group rates, it is also often a benefit costing employers less than it would cost the individual. One of the reforms which could have been enacted would have been to allow individuals to leave employment yet continue with the same plan while paying the employer rate. Would have been a far better alternative, with more freedom at a lower cost.

Problem for neosocialists being, it would not have allowed government control, redistribution, access to medical records, push-notification of government dependency programs, or empowerment of the Committee on Comparative Effectiveness Research as an eventual care-rationing Death Panel.