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 U.S. Insurance industry takes in $1 trillion in premiums every year and has assets of nearly $4 trillion. That's more than the GDPs of all but 2 countries in the entire world.
The CEOs of the top 10 life and health insurance companies in America, earn an average of $9-12 million a year.
In the meantime, we spend more on health care as a percentage of GDP than Japan, the UK, Germany & Switzerland. Yet we have a lower life expectancy and higher infant mortality rates.
There was a commentary in the WSJ this week that addressed the GDP canard. The point of the writer was: So what? The money we spend on health care is paid to Americans. It is a vital part of a consumer economy. Less money spent on health care means fewer high paying jobs. Is that a good thing?
As for infant mortality when you abort one out of two babies conceived and single out fetuses with birth defects to kill, which most first world countries do, then sure that will make your numbers of live births look good.
Finally as regards life expectancy there are many factors other than the quality of health care that plays into that. For example life style choices play a big role. Obesity is a choice. So, too, is the gangbanger life style that fills our ERs on a nightly basis.
Yea and get ready for that luxury to change Captain!!!
I bet you'll be paying 30% of the cost which is reasonable in the future. Mark my words if this passes, the days of you getting free health care from you company are done with.
well, im using current figures and estimating costs for what we are doing today. i understand thats not good for you because it doesnt prove your point but that is reality.
i understand you would like to use reality when it works for you and then change over to fantasy world at your convenience. im going to stick with reality for the purpose of calculating our health insurance costs.
Employers with aggregate wages over $400,000 that chose not to offer coverage would be
required to make contributions equal to 8% of the average wages paid by the employer. Small
employers with aggregate wages below $250,000 would be exempt from requirements. Those
with aggregate wages over $250,000 and below $300,000 would be required to pay 2% of
average wages, those with aggregate wages over $300,000 and below $350,000 would be
required to pay 4%, and those with aggregate wages above $350,000 and below $400,000 would
be required to pay 6%.
Okay so let's do some math
I'm a small business with the following
35 Employees
Average Salary is 60,000
Cost (35*60,000) = 2,100,000 (Operational Cost of Wages in a year)
I met the first requirement of 400,000 based on average wages
Now, I can get private insurance (hypothetically for 400 for single and 500 family)
Only 10 of my employees are married
I'll pay 40% of the cost
25*(400*.6) = 6,000
10*(500*.6) = 3,000
My employees Pay 9,000 a month or 108,000 a year in prems
25*(400*.4) = 4,000
10*(500*.4) = 2,000
As the employer i pay 6,000 a month or 72,000 a year in prems
So total cost is 180,000 a year in Prems for medical coverage
Now the government is going to charge me 8% on how much i pay-out in salary
I pay-out 2,100,000*.08 = 168,000 dollars
My current plan 180,000
Gov plan is 168,000
Yea, that is a savings of 12,000 bucks
WAIT I TRICKED YOU
REMEMBER MY EMPLOYEES PAY A PORTION OF THE COST. I"M ONLY PAYING 40% of the COST.
IT only cost me 72,000 a year, so why would i move to the governments plan?????????
Now
72,000 i pay
168,000 i pay to the government if i have no medical insurance plan (would seem to me the gov is pushing for me to keep my plan not loose it)
See the errors of your thinking???? (Remember Employers pay partial cost in today's medical arena, so if anything, i think those plans where the employer paid 100 percent of cost, employees will now have to pay some of the cost for medical coverage. )
Now, if someone owns a small business my question would be are my prems and stuff in the range of what you pay and is the average salary i quoted higher than average for a company of this size>>?????
Your numbers are way off.
I suppose that depending on the type of business, you might have an avg salary of 60k, but for the vast majority of small businesses, that's outrageously high. Most small businesses are retail, restaurants, manufacturing... A law or architectural firm could see that, but those are few and far between. Around 70% of jobs in this country are provided by small businesses - are 70% of the people in the country making 60k?
Also, 40% is a pretty small portion for an employer to pay. It's typically much higher - as much as 100% in many cases - and I've never seen it lower than 50%.
You also didn't include the cost of administering the plan. Who's doing that? How much are you paying them? How much office space is allotted to that job/position? How much time (time is money) is the business owner and plan administrator spending reviewing the plans each year?
Now, I can get private insurance (hypothetically for 400 for single and 500 family)
400 is low for single but not out of the question. i believe its around 450 or so for a single for us for our plan. however, 500 for a family? no way. we dont typically cover families but i believe the number is around 1100 or so for family coverage.
As a conservative, I find myself on the fence regarding the "public option." On one hand, I want all American's to have access to affordable health insurance, and I am also slightly offended by the obscene profits that insurance companies often make. I am especially offended by these profits while they turn away those with pre-existing conditions. Insuring the healthy appears to be the driving goal because its a cash cow for Big Insurance.
On the other hand, I don't believe government is being straight with us over who will pay for the "public option." As a result, I am not convinced that taxes won't be raised on the middle class. Further, history has shown that government cannot be trusted to draft, enact, and manage entitlement programs efficiently.
Therefore, I am on the fence on this issue. Where do other conservatives stand?
I do not see how you can be a conservative and believe a government take over of health care is the answer for bringing needed change to any portion of the private sector.
Medicare, Social Security, Medicaid, Welfare, these are run by the government, all of them are being run much worse then the private sector health care, and many of the problems in private sector healthcare. Look at Fed Ex and UPS, they are doing fine, its the post office that is always having problems.
As a conservative, I find myself on the fence regarding the "public option." On one hand, I want all American's to have access to affordable health insurance, and I am also slightly offended by the obscene profits that insurance companies often make. I am especially offended by these profits while they turn away those with pre-existing conditions. Insuring the healthy appears to be the driving goal because its a cash cow for Big Insurance.
On the other hand, I don't believe government is being straight with us over who will pay for the "public option." As a result, I am not convinced that taxes won't be raised on the middle class. Further, history has shown that government cannot be trusted to draft, enact, and manage entitlement programs efficiently.
Therefore, I am on the fence on this issue. Where do other conservatives stand?
I'm with you on your statement. You wouldn't believe how bad the current system is. Even those with pre-existing conditions can be locked out of the system if the company they work for goes chapter 7 or the company's group coverage is covering less than 20 people. The ill employee or the spouse of the employee is not qualify for COBRA to bridge the gap between group coverages. These people do have the option in getting coverage thru HIPAA at huge premiums, usually over $2000 a month.
Personally, I think more focus and investigation needs to go into WHY healthcare costs so much. I'm amazed at how over-looked this is.
Depending on "where", higher-ranked nurses can make $50 an hour, if not more. I've had many typical office visits run damn near $200. Why????
Personally, I think doctors and clinics and hospitals charge what they do because they know they can!!! And the insurance companies go along and pay it.
Have you looked at the cost of malpractice insurance lately?
Quote:
Many areas of the country, especially around major metropolitan areas, are experiencing large increases in the average costs of premiums. Between 2003 and 2004, Dade County in Florida, which includes the city of Miami, went from $249,000 to $277,000, an increase of about 11 percent.
In that same period, Cook County in Illinois, which includes Chicago, jumped about 67 percent from $138,000 to more than $230,000. Wayne County in Michigan, which includes Detroit, went up 18 percent, from almost $164,000 to nearly $194,000.
A quarter million dollars per year just for ONE year of ONE type of insurance?
Tort reform and removing the (federally imposed) barriers that keep companies from selling plans across state lines. Those two things would do more to reduce the REAL costs of insurance than anything else the government could do, INCLUDING the "public option".
Because it will impact everyone else. When there is a government option, the government will have an unfair advantage and there will not be fair competition. There is nothing to stop companies from dumping their own benefits and throwing employees to the mercy of the public plan.
It sounds good in theory to say...."if you don't want it, don't choose it" but the reality is that many people will be forced into it by default.
Where in the US Constitution does it say that employers provide health insurance to employees? Nowhere, that nonsense needs to end also.
A quarter million dollars per year just for ONE year of ONE type of insurance?
Tort reform and removing the (federally imposed) barriers that keep companies from selling plans across state lines. Those two things would do more to reduce the REAL costs of insurance than anything else the government could do, INCLUDING the "public option".
Yes, I know. It IS very staggering. But how often do you hear of others lower in the totem pole, like nurses, get sued? Unless it's someone like a private care nurse, that is.
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.
