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.
And actually, now that I think about it, these employers DO have the freedom to not provide insurance (granted, they wouldn't if they want to remain competitive in retaining good employees).
They'll just pay a fine on their tax bill that will go towards subsidizing those employees on the healthcare exchange and Medicare.
Which is absurd, right? You're shifting the responsibility of healthcare on to employers.... most of which aren't in the healthcare field. You can't fine them for not performing a duty unrelated to their business.
What does the ACA have to do with anything in the OP? Why even mention it?
Again, your reading comprehension is where you are failing. I was responding to collegeguy35, who brought up the ACA. You might fit better into this conversation if you actually read the thread you are commenting in.
I feel like I'm having a conversation with a five year old. You asked a dozen questions, applied no critical thinking, and then made stuff up to attempt to prove your point. Major fail.
Which is absurd, right? You're shifting the responsibility of healthcare on to employers.... most of which aren't in the healthcare field. You can't fine them for not performing a duty unrelated to their business.
No one's shifting anything. Just like before the ACA, the responsibility of providing healthcare still belongs to doctors. Nothing absurd about it.
And businesses are only paying a tax fine to the government if they choose not to provide health insurance. That money can be used for anything (the subsidizing of the healthcare exchange and medicare was merely an example).
Which is absurd, right? You're shifting the responsibility of healthcare on to employers.... most of which aren't in the healthcare field. You can't fine them for not performing a duty unrelated to their business.
Employers took it on themselves over 60 years ago. Employer Health Insurance was a byproduct of wage freezes ordered by government, in an era when we needed more warm bodies in the workforce, due to pent up demand (post WWII) and lack of automation, so the stuff Americans like, was labor intensive to make.
No one's shifting anything. Just like before the ACA, the responsibility of providing healthcare still belongs to doctors. Nothing absurd about it.
And businesses are only paying a tax fine to the government if they choose not to provide health insurance. That money can be used for anything (the subsidizing of the healthcare exchange and medicare was merely an example).
A tax fine is absurd because it is putting a burden on businesses. But a similar incentive for employers to provide insurance could be achieved in a much better way. Think about this. If an employer chooses not to provide health insurance, nothing happens. But if they DO decide to provide health insurance, they receive a tax deduction. That way you are not providing additional burden on the business and are still incentivizing them to provide this benefit.
A tax fine is absurd because it is putting a burden on businesses. But a similar incentive for employers to provide insurance could be achieved in a much better way. Think about this. If an employer chooses not to provide health insurance, nothing happens. But if they DO decide to provide health insurance, they receive a tax deduction. That way you are not providing additional burden on the business and are still incentivizing them to provide this benefit.
Some employers get that incentive through the ACA now.
Employers took it on themselves over 60 years ago. Employer Health Insurance was a byproduct of wage freezes ordered by government, in an era when we needed more warm bodies in the workforce, due to pent up demand (post WWII) and lack of automation, so the stuff Americans like, was labor intensive to make.
Did 1950 employers forsee ACA requirements?
Not all employers did. It's incorrect to suggest that all employers participating in providing health insurance to their employees.
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.
