Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The current system of coupling health care benefits to employment, IMHO, is stupid. Few if any developed countries do this. In most other countries where you work has nothing to do with what health care coverage you have available to you. But here in the U.S., it has almost everything to do with your health care coverage you can get and plays a huge part in what jobs you will take (or which jobs you can afford to quit due to loss of health coverage). That is just absurd!
There should be either a single-payer, Medicare for all type system. And/or there should be a private-provider based system but in which the entire U.S. population is treated as one big gigantic health insurance pool and market.
Anyway, the point is that where you work should have nothing to do with what health coverage you can get.
Imagine, say, if where you worked limited your options in terms of where you could shop for groceries or clothes or where your children could go to school, etc etc. For instance, if you worked at XYZ company, you could shop at certain stores at reasonable prices but would have to pay exhorbitant prices if you shopped elsewhere. And if you were fired or quit, you'd have to pay exhorbitant prices to shop anywhere. Well you would say that that is absurd. But is it not really any less absurd than saying that where you work determines what insurance you can get for reasonable coverage at a reasonable price.
Here are some articles that talk about this among many others:
The current system of coupling health care benefits to employment, IMHO, is stupid. Few if any developed countries do this. In most other countries where you work has nothing to do with what health care coverage you have available to you. But here in the U.S., it has almost everything to do with your health care coverage you can get and plays a huge part in what jobs you will take (or which jobs you can afford to quit due to loss of health coverage). That is just absurd!
There should be either a single-payer, Medicare for all type system. And/or there should be a private-provider based system but in which the entire U.S. population is treated as one big gigantic health insurance pool and market.
Anyway, the point is that where you work should have nothing to do with what health coverage you can get.
Imagine, say, if where you worked limited your options in terms of where you could shop for groceries or clothes or where your children could go to school, etc etc. For instance, if you worked at XYZ company, you could shop at certain stores at reasonable prices but would have to pay exhorbitant prices if you shopped elsewhere. And if you were fired or quit, you'd have to pay exhorbitant prices to shop anywhere. Well you would say that that is absurd. But is it not really any less absurd than saying that where you work determines what insurance you can get for reasonable coverage at a reasonable price.
Here are some articles that talk about this among many others:
But you alos have to realise that it really coupled as the companies pay increased tax burdens to the governamnt. Plus there are other taxes that people poay to get the revenues. Bascially mnay make much larger salaries to compensate. There are still private medical availble for theose who wnat it. Its a two r iter system really. We are headed to a three tier system.Basically nothing is free is always true.Wait ubtil states start poickig up their incease in cost for peopleshiofted to medicaid . The states are goig to be in a revenur lurch.Nelson of Nebraska got a exemption as he said it would bakrupt his stae. Seems alot of companies now getting exemption that will drive even more to forced medicaid on taxpayers. Rememeber at a certai income you have no chocie but medicaid to keep the CBO cost down to the federal budget spreadig it to state taxpayers more.Beside if they force companies to be either providing or apy a new feee to feds it is coupked more than even with employment.Same with universal coverage ;its paid by companies and people employed thru taxes. Its not free.
No company I ever worked for mandated that I take the insurance they offered. If you don't want it, don't take it.
You are completely misunderstanding the point.
The point is not that you are mandated to take it. The point is that your health care options available to you are (for the vast majority of people) tied to where you or your spouse work. And very few people are going to be able to get health coverage on their own better than the one that they get through work.
If you work for a company with great benefits, then that is great. But what if you don't? Or what if you did but got laid off? Or what if you want to move jobs but can't because if you did you'd lose good health coverage because your potential newer job doesn't have as good coverage?
Where you work and what kind of health coverage options you have available to you should be de-coupled.
The current system of coupling health care benefits to employment, IMHO, is stupid. Few if any developed countries do this. In most other countries where you work has nothing to do with what health care coverage you have available to you. But here in the U.S., it has almost everything to do with your health care coverage you can get and plays a huge part in what jobs you will take (or which jobs you can afford to quit due to loss of health coverage). That is just absurd!
There should be either a single-payer, Medicare for all type system. And/or there should be a private-provider based system but in which the entire U.S. population is treated as one big gigantic health insurance pool and market.
Anyway, the point is that where you work should have nothing to do with what health coverage you can get.
Imagine, say, if where you worked limited your options in terms of where you could shop for groceries or clothes or where your children could go to school, etc etc. For instance, if you worked at XYZ company, you could shop at certain stores at reasonable prices but would have to pay exhorbitant prices if you shopped elsewhere. And if you were fired or quit, you'd have to pay exhorbitant prices to shop anywhere. Well you would say that that is absurd. But is it not really any less absurd than saying that where you work determines what insurance you can get for reasonable coverage at a reasonable price.
Here are some articles that talk about this among many others:
No company I ever worked for mandated that I take the insurance they offered. If you don't want it, don't take it.
That is true, but if I decline their insurance, they refuse to pay me the money to get another plan.
As for separating between workplace and health insurance, its not a minute too soon. Employers should be freed from this obligation.
But it costs more, and you're subject to all the pre-existing condition crap.
Exactly. All the money spent of tax subsidies and corporate subsidies and such to make health care affordable if you work for the right company should simply be done away with so that you can get decent coverage regardless of where you work or even if you work (if you are laid off for instance). Right now it costs WAY more to get health care on your own than through your employer.
But it costs more, and you're subject to all the pre-existing condition crap.
Yes it costs more. Life stinks sometimes doesn't it?
So who should pay for people with pre-existing conditions?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
