Home
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
Latest activity
Members
Current visitors
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Home
Forums
The Competition
FedEx Discussions
Obamacare
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Ricochet1a" data-source="post: 1007797" data-attributes="member: 22880"><p>Obamacare had the INTENDED side effect of establishing penalties to employers who DON'T provide coverage that meets the minimum requirements of the act - which were LOWER than the cost to actually provide the insurance on their own. </p><p></p><p>When "penalties" are assessed (normally), the intent is to provide a dis-incentive for the behavior being penalized. </p><p></p><p>Not with Obamacare. The penalties are LOWER than the cost to provide coverage that meets the requirements. So business has an incentive to NOT purchase health care coverage, and merely pay the "penalty" (health tax by any other name), and let the government worry about providing health care. </p><p></p><p>Now, employers who have a need to provide top notch health benefits to attract and maintain a qualified workforce can and will maintain to provide their own coverage. Nothing in the legislation prevents that.</p><p></p><p>Employers who DIDN'T offer any sort of health care coverage - will now be assessed the cost of the annual penalty for each employee they have that meets certain criteria (hours worked). They won't decide to provide health coverage, they'll just pay the "tax" and let the government have at it. </p><p></p><p><em>And I believe this is a major contributor to the economy still lagging after 4 years - when traditionally most recessions only last about 2 years and a return to "normalcy" occurs. The anticipation of this "employment head tax" has inhibited hiring of employees - especially by small business, the traditional "engine" of growth out of a recession. </em></p><p><em></em></p><p><em></em>The businesses that will be most adversely affected by Obamacare are small businesses. They traditionally have had a difficult time offering health insurance coverage to their employees (they aren't large enough to get the volume discounts on capitation rates offered to large corporations). And don't have the revenue stream to be able to absorb the higher cost of providing coverage to all of their employees without seriously impacting profitability (and business viability). </p><p></p><p>It is the businesses that are "in the middle", that Obamacare will potentially affect the greatest. These businesses are looking at health care costs that are increasing ABOVE the rate of inflation - and placing an ever increasing burden on the viability of the company. These businesses will be sorely tempted to just "throw in the towel", pay the health care head tax and get out of providing health care for their wage employees....</p><p></p><p>This is where I see FedEx potentially going in the future. They'll offer their own health care package to the salaried employees - but the wage employees will be forced into the exchanges (FedEx would rather pay the "tax" than continue to worry about escalating costs of providing coverage to their "hired help"). </p><p></p><p>Just as companies are looking at a "two-tiered" approach to compensation (UPS is about to go down that path), I believe that the US health care market will do the same - a two tiered approach. One tier will have coverage for all conditions (and cost upwards of $15-20k a year to provide per family), and the other tier will mirror the British NHS, with long waits for essentially rationed procedures, production line care and "socialized" outcomes. For those who don't have health care now - this will be a "winner". For those that can afford to purchase their own insurance (or who are valuable enough to their employer for it to be provided as part of their benefit package), they will merely pay a few thousand a year extra to maintain what they have now. </p><p></p><p>For those who have experienced the "joys" of health care as provided by the US Armed Forces (I've experienced this as both a member of the Armed Forces and as a dependent back when care wasn't "outsourced" to civilian providers), I can tell you, I DON'T want my care to be turned into what I saw and experienced. I remember VIVIDLY waiting for HOURS with a broken arm in a military hospital, waiting to be seen, then waiting for the specialist to arrive, then finally having my arm set after about 5 hours. In a civilian (current health care system), that would've NEVER HAPPENED. </p><p></p><p>It is those in the middle, which stand to lose in this whole deal. They will be shifted out of what is currently the "top tier" (those with insurance provided by their employer), and into the governmental "exchanges" - which will be a public heath system in all but name. </p><p></p><p>There is a better way of providing some form of heath care to those who can't afford it - while preserving the quality of care for those who currently possess it. Given the tendency of corporate America to shave some extra profit where ever they can manage - providing an "easy out" for corporations ISN'T the correct solution. </p><p></p><p>This is why I sincerely hope that Obamacare will be repealed and thrown into the scrap heap, and talks begin on a way to seriously control the explosive growth of health care costs (tort reform, standardization of billing, establishment of PUBLICALLY disclosed rate schedules for providers, ending of the game of "in-network, out-of-network", ending of cost shifting done to artifically accomodate those who don't have insurance, and a host of other needed changes). Each political party has their terf and ideology they are trying to protect - which needs to be placed aside for the benefit of all. I don't see this happening, but I also don't want to start down the road of socialized health care while Americans realize that they are the ones losing in the debate. </p><p></p><p>Given that the Couriers of Express haven't realized (as a group) that they are getting shafted - I hold out little hope for Americans to realize they are getting shafted should Obamacare get too much traction. Once an entitlement program gets established, ending it is next to impossible.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Ricochet1a, post: 1007797, member: 22880"] Obamacare had the INTENDED side effect of establishing penalties to employers who DON'T provide coverage that meets the minimum requirements of the act - which were LOWER than the cost to actually provide the insurance on their own. When "penalties" are assessed (normally), the intent is to provide a dis-incentive for the behavior being penalized. Not with Obamacare. The penalties are LOWER than the cost to provide coverage that meets the requirements. So business has an incentive to NOT purchase health care coverage, and merely pay the "penalty" (health tax by any other name), and let the government worry about providing health care. Now, employers who have a need to provide top notch health benefits to attract and maintain a qualified workforce can and will maintain to provide their own coverage. Nothing in the legislation prevents that. Employers who DIDN'T offer any sort of health care coverage - will now be assessed the cost of the annual penalty for each employee they have that meets certain criteria (hours worked). They won't decide to provide health coverage, they'll just pay the "tax" and let the government have at it. [I]And I believe this is a major contributor to the economy still lagging after 4 years - when traditionally most recessions only last about 2 years and a return to "normalcy" occurs. The anticipation of this "employment head tax" has inhibited hiring of employees - especially by small business, the traditional "engine" of growth out of a recession. [/I]The businesses that will be most adversely affected by Obamacare are small businesses. They traditionally have had a difficult time offering health insurance coverage to their employees (they aren't large enough to get the volume discounts on capitation rates offered to large corporations). And don't have the revenue stream to be able to absorb the higher cost of providing coverage to all of their employees without seriously impacting profitability (and business viability). It is the businesses that are "in the middle", that Obamacare will potentially affect the greatest. These businesses are looking at health care costs that are increasing ABOVE the rate of inflation - and placing an ever increasing burden on the viability of the company. These businesses will be sorely tempted to just "throw in the towel", pay the health care head tax and get out of providing health care for their wage employees.... This is where I see FedEx potentially going in the future. They'll offer their own health care package to the salaried employees - but the wage employees will be forced into the exchanges (FedEx would rather pay the "tax" than continue to worry about escalating costs of providing coverage to their "hired help"). Just as companies are looking at a "two-tiered" approach to compensation (UPS is about to go down that path), I believe that the US health care market will do the same - a two tiered approach. One tier will have coverage for all conditions (and cost upwards of $15-20k a year to provide per family), and the other tier will mirror the British NHS, with long waits for essentially rationed procedures, production line care and "socialized" outcomes. For those who don't have health care now - this will be a "winner". For those that can afford to purchase their own insurance (or who are valuable enough to their employer for it to be provided as part of their benefit package), they will merely pay a few thousand a year extra to maintain what they have now. For those who have experienced the "joys" of health care as provided by the US Armed Forces (I've experienced this as both a member of the Armed Forces and as a dependent back when care wasn't "outsourced" to civilian providers), I can tell you, I DON'T want my care to be turned into what I saw and experienced. I remember VIVIDLY waiting for HOURS with a broken arm in a military hospital, waiting to be seen, then waiting for the specialist to arrive, then finally having my arm set after about 5 hours. In a civilian (current health care system), that would've NEVER HAPPENED. It is those in the middle, which stand to lose in this whole deal. They will be shifted out of what is currently the "top tier" (those with insurance provided by their employer), and into the governmental "exchanges" - which will be a public heath system in all but name. There is a better way of providing some form of heath care to those who can't afford it - while preserving the quality of care for those who currently possess it. Given the tendency of corporate America to shave some extra profit where ever they can manage - providing an "easy out" for corporations ISN'T the correct solution. This is why I sincerely hope that Obamacare will be repealed and thrown into the scrap heap, and talks begin on a way to seriously control the explosive growth of health care costs (tort reform, standardization of billing, establishment of PUBLICALLY disclosed rate schedules for providers, ending of the game of "in-network, out-of-network", ending of cost shifting done to artifically accomodate those who don't have insurance, and a host of other needed changes). Each political party has their terf and ideology they are trying to protect - which needs to be placed aside for the benefit of all. I don't see this happening, but I also don't want to start down the road of socialized health care while Americans realize that they are the ones losing in the debate. Given that the Couriers of Express haven't realized (as a group) that they are getting shafted - I hold out little hope for Americans to realize they are getting shafted should Obamacare get too much traction. Once an entitlement program gets established, ending it is next to impossible. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Home
Forums
The Competition
FedEx Discussions
Obamacare
Top