- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Why is health care basically tied to your place of employment?
Posted on 9/3/20 at 11:55 am
Posted on 9/3/20 at 11:55 am
This post is not a pro/anti ACA thread. Just wanted some insight on this topic. Maybe someone can explain this to me because it doesn't make any sense.
Generally speaking, why is the quality of health care you are afforded is tied to what your employer is willing to pay for? If you have a shitty employer only willing to supply the bare minimum required just so their employees can "have healthcare", how's is that beneficial for the people under its umbrella? More than likely, people in this type of situation are stuck and forced to take it because they can't afford any other options.
Would it be better to have a system not tied to your place of employment?
Generally speaking, why is the quality of health care you are afforded is tied to what your employer is willing to pay for? If you have a shitty employer only willing to supply the bare minimum required just so their employees can "have healthcare", how's is that beneficial for the people under its umbrella? More than likely, people in this type of situation are stuck and forced to take it because they can't afford any other options.
Would it be better to have a system not tied to your place of employment?
This post was edited on 9/3/20 at 12:13 pm
24
Posted on 9/3/20 at 11:57 am to Hammond Tiger Fan
because this country has insane tax preference when it comes to health insurance vs. income.
health insurance offered to you by an employer is not taxed. Income is. this greatly incentivizes health insurgence to be tied to employment.
health insurance offered to you by an employer is not taxed. Income is. this greatly incentivizes health insurgence to be tied to employment.
Posted on 9/3/20 at 11:58 am to Hammond Tiger Fan
quote:
Would it be better to have a system not tied to your place of employer?
Yes, what else would you like to know?
There has to be some lobbying interests that have caused the environment to become what it is today (even pre ACA), but I don't know what it is.
Neal Boortz was always saying "He who controls your healthcare, controls your life."
Posted on 9/3/20 at 11:58 am to Hammond Tiger Fan
It goes back to wage controls under FDR.
Employers couldn’t offer higher wages so they started offering other benefits such as health care as part of the job.
Employers couldn’t offer higher wages so they started offering other benefits such as health care as part of the job.
Posted on 9/3/20 at 11:59 am to Hammond Tiger Fan
quote:
why is the quality of health care you are afforded is tied to what your employer is willing to pay for?
There are some coverages that are better, and usually cost more, but cost and quality of healthcare can be immensely divergent
Posted on 9/3/20 at 12:00 pm to Hammond Tiger Fan
quote:
Would it be better to have a system not tied to your place of employer?
There is nothing stopping you from buying better insurance. You can go straight to Blue Cross and pay for a plan.
Posted on 9/3/20 at 12:00 pm to teke184
Wow it’s almost like the free market was working perfectly until socialistic policies fricked it all up
Posted on 9/3/20 at 12:01 pm to Hammond Tiger Fan
My understanding is that this started with the FDR-era price and wages controls.
The FedGov said "you can't pay this person more than $xxx".
So to attract good employees, companies started to get creative in terms of what else they offered in addition to the fixed wages.
Warning: I am not a Historian, nor do I play one on TV. This explanation might be somewhat mangled. If someone knows better, please correct me.
The FedGov said "you can't pay this person more than $xxx".
So to attract good employees, companies started to get creative in terms of what else they offered in addition to the fixed wages.
Warning: I am not a Historian, nor do I play one on TV. This explanation might be somewhat mangled. If someone knows better, please correct me.
Posted on 9/3/20 at 12:06 pm to Hammond Tiger Fan
The simple answer to your question is that it is not.
ANYONE can get some form of heath "insurance". In this country, even if you are a complete irresponsible brokedick, or not even a legal citizen, you have access to world leading healthcare.
Your (private) employer is under no obligation whatsoever to offer you health insurance. Them doing so is simply a BENEFIT offered to entice quality employees. If your employer offers you a health insurance plan below the standards you desire you are free to (a) pay for a private plan or (b) find an employer who offers better benefits.
ANYONE can get some form of heath "insurance". In this country, even if you are a complete irresponsible brokedick, or not even a legal citizen, you have access to world leading healthcare.
Your (private) employer is under no obligation whatsoever to offer you health insurance. Them doing so is simply a BENEFIT offered to entice quality employees. If your employer offers you a health insurance plan below the standards you desire you are free to (a) pay for a private plan or (b) find an employer who offers better benefits.
Posted on 9/3/20 at 12:07 pm to Hammond Tiger Fan
Until I went to work in the Healthcare Industry my health care was not tied to work. Health Insurance was tied to employer, but not any care.
Care takes place where health care professionals work. Insurance is provided by most other employers. Don't fall into the trap of conflating the two. Govt. and employers do NOT provide care (exception being the healthcare industry employees).
Care takes place where health care professionals work. Insurance is provided by most other employers. Don't fall into the trap of conflating the two. Govt. and employers do NOT provide care (exception being the healthcare industry employees).
Posted on 9/3/20 at 12:08 pm to Hammond Tiger Fan
Government central planning. Why can’t insurance sell across state lines? Same lunacy.
Posted on 9/3/20 at 12:11 pm to Hammond Tiger Fan
quote:
Why is health care basically tied to your place of employment?
Like most things it goes back to govt interference in the market place. Health insurance is simply a compensation benefit. Health insurance was originally offered to counter tax policies. Fast forward a few years and it became a very popular piece of a compensation package.
A few posts above basically nails it. Govt interference leads to businesses being creative and coming up with solutions to get around govt road blocks.
This post was edited on 9/3/20 at 12:13 pm
Posted on 9/3/20 at 12:11 pm to Hammond Tiger Fan
quote:
Would it be better to have a system not tied to your place of employer?
You can thank Bill Clinton for this...
Yes, it would be better if employers had to compete with the benefits they provide in order to attract employees... However, this is what government mandates get you...
So, you set a minimum and are expecting companies to do more? LOL...
Posted on 9/3/20 at 12:13 pm to M. A. Ryland
Didn’t that crook FDR also start the biggest taxpayer deception by pushing to enact tax withholding from paychecks?
Posted on 9/3/20 at 12:16 pm to Styxion
quote:
There is nothing stopping you from buying better insurance. You can go straight to Blue Cross and pay for a plan.
True, but that's usually not a realistic option b/c it's not affordable for most people
Posted on 9/3/20 at 12:20 pm to Hammond Tiger Fan
quote:
Would it be better to have a system not tied to your place of employment?
Health care is not tied your employer, some people might elect to take up their employer's health insurance plan.
quote:
True, but that's usually not a realistic option b/c it's not affordable for most people
But that is not what your thread was about.
Maybe the problem is medical monopolies and health insurance? (but a different discussion than your OP)
This post was edited on 9/3/20 at 12:22 pm
Posted on 9/3/20 at 12:27 pm to Hammond Tiger Fan
The easy answer is that it’s not.
That being said, I pay 75% of the premium for my employees. They are free to get their own elsewhere, but I’m paying for our plan.
That being said, I pay 75% of the premium for my employees. They are free to get their own elsewhere, but I’m paying for our plan.
Posted on 9/3/20 at 12:31 pm to Hammond Tiger Fan
quote:It is not, you can always pay for a policy yourself.
Generally speaking, why is the quality of health care you are afforded is tied to what your employer is willing to pay for?
It is a benefit.
quote:see above
Would it be better to have a system not tied to your place of employment?
quote:ahh hahhhhh....so it is important, but not important enough for any personal planning or sacrifice?
More than likely, people in this type of situation are stuck and forced to take it because they can't afford any other options.
Posted on 9/3/20 at 12:34 pm to Forever
quote:
Wow it’s almost like the free market was working perfectly until socialistic policies fricked it all up
you mean the utopia that was healthcare for the common man in 1920?
Posted on 9/3/20 at 12:35 pm to Hammond Tiger Fan
quote:
This post is not a pro/anti ACA thread. Just wanted some insight on this topic. Maybe someone can explain this to me because it doesn't make any sense.
bullshite
Let me guess , you have crappy insurance or no insurance.
Buy your own health insurance.
Page 1 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News