Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 02-07-2014, 01:01 PM
 
Location: Phoenix, AZ
20,413 posts, read 14,698,234 times
Reputation: 39533

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Goinback2011 View Post
Unless your employer provides one of the Cadillac Plans granted an exemption until 2018, you'll be getting an Obamacare plan sold to Employers.

Remember the delayed 'Employer Mandate'? It's up next year.

I just read the employer mandate rules, don't see how it affects me. Our plans are not "Cadillac" plans, but they do cover over 60% of covered costs and they are considered "affordable." So...why would we be getting an Obamacare plan sold to employers when our Blue Cross/Blue Shield plan already fits the rules?

And if our plan did not fit the rules, that means my employer would have to wiggle things a bit until it did, or pay tax penalties. I'm pretty sure that the insurance companies and the lawyers hired by big companies like mine have found ways to make things work within the framework of Obamacare.

Not that it makes a ton of sense to me. But based on what I just read, I don't see it affecting my life a whole lot--this year, next year, or in 2018.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 02-07-2014, 01:04 PM
 
Location: The analog world
17,077 posts, read 13,388,095 times
Reputation: 22904
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quick Enough View Post
They are NOT in the health care business. They provide INSURANCE so you CAN get CAN get health care. Big difference.
Some very large employers self-fund and self-administer health plans, while others negotiate contracts with insurers and subsidize their employee's costs.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-07-2014, 01:10 PM
 
Location: Great State of Texas
86,052 posts, read 84,557,218 times
Reputation: 27720
Quote:
Originally Posted by randomparent View Post
Some very large employers self-fund and self-administer health plans, while others negotiate contracts with insurers and subsidize their employee's costs.
That's what Obamacare does so why is that bad ?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-07-2014, 01:11 PM
 
Location: Salisbury,NC
16,760 posts, read 8,228,532 times
Reputation: 8537
Another scare thread!

The company I retired from is still giving good heathcare to current employees as well as pre-medicare retirees. If you want employees to stay around you need to offer good bennies.

The CEO of AOL really stepped in it along with the change to their 401K. He is worried about loosing his best and brightest to competition and is trying to tie them in with the 401K match.

It seems that with the ACA, the fear of leaving a job because of bennies has ended.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-07-2014, 01:13 PM
 
Location: The analog world
17,077 posts, read 13,388,095 times
Reputation: 22904
Quote:
Originally Posted by HappyTexan View Post
That's what Obamacare does so why is that bad ?
You are under the mistaken impression that I have expressed an opinion about the matter. I have not. I was simply clarifying a previous point about how employer health plans work.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-07-2014, 01:33 PM
 
17,403 posts, read 11,991,419 times
Reputation: 16161
Quote:
Originally Posted by desertdetroiter View Post
Yes...but only in the way that government involves itself in healthcare in any country with single payer.

I definitely believe that in such a system, government should negotiate drug prices the way Canada does it.
So you think that an employer shouldn't provide insurance coverage as a perk of employment, but the government should run healthcare?

One is something that the employer and employee can decide upon, and gives the employee somewhat of a choice.

The other is a takeover of healthcare, by an entity that can't run anything efficiently, where the insured gets no choice.

I bet if I asked you, you'd deny that you are a socialist.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-07-2014, 01:35 PM
 
17,403 posts, read 11,991,419 times
Reputation: 16161
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ivorytickler View Post
I have to agree with you. I would rather have the money my employer puts towards my insurance and purchase my own insurance. Well, I would have pre obamacare. The option I would prefer, which you can't do under obamacare is put the money aside and purchase a major medical policy to cover me fore catastrophic events.
Employers aren't going to give employees that money. So in effect, it will lower wages.

Yup, another shoe falling on the middle class.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-07-2014, 04:33 PM
 
56,988 posts, read 35,241,592 times
Reputation: 18824
Quote:
Originally Posted by ringwise View Post
So you think that an employer shouldn't provide insurance coverage as a perk of employment, but the government should run healthcare?

One is something that the employer and employee can decide upon, and gives the employee somewhat of a choice.

The other is a takeover of healthcare, by an entity that can't run anything efficiently, where the insured gets no choice.

I bet if I asked you, you'd deny that you are a socialist.
What other country asks its employers to dive into the healthcare business?

Why should employers be involved in that transaction?

Besides, our government is already involved in healthcare. Expand Medicare and you've got single payer. Why the redundancy with employers when their international competitors don't have to bother with it?

Government can't run anything? Good. I'll then assume that you've been strongly against all recent wars. Right? Or are inefficient wars ok?

As to whether or not I'm a socialist....what do you care. Just worry about your own political affiliation.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-07-2014, 04:35 PM
 
Location: Wartrace,TN
8,083 posts, read 12,804,222 times
Reputation: 16555
It is probably going to be an issue once the contract is up for renewal next year.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-07-2014, 04:37 PM
 
34,279 posts, read 19,397,951 times
Reputation: 17261
My company probably will since the ACA ones are cheaper and cover more.......So....yeah probably.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top