Greenbeard
Gold Member
We are going to see literally millions of Americans lose their employer based Coverage because it will be cheaper in nearly EVERY case for the company to pay the fines than to provide coverage.
Let's say I pay Employee X $40,000 in wages and $10,000 in health benefits for a total compensation of $50,000. If I don't provide to my employees--including Employee X--I'll pay a $2,000 penalty for Employee X a few years down the road.
So what are you suggesting is cheaper here? To give Employee X a 20% pay cut by wiping out his benefits and not raising his wages at all to compensate? I don't know how to break it to you, but slashing compensation by 20% is always cheaper than not doing that (the existence of the fine will in fact make it slightly less profitable since doing so then only saves you $8,000 and not $10,000).
You think no employer has ever had the revelation "hey, if I compensated my employees less, that would be cheaper"?
Furthermore I am asserting that that was the Goal of this bill all along. Obama told us long ago in that Interview. I am not going to dig it up now. But Basically what he said was he wants single payer, but we can not go right to that, so we have to Takes steps, and This IMO was one of them. Crash the private health insurance market and give people only 1 choice left. Then single payer sails through congress. That IMO is his plan, and was his plan all along. Which is why I think this Bill is such a dishonest piece of Garbage.
Single-payer is not the opposite of an employer-based insurance system. It's the opposite of a multi-payer system. It's perfectly possible to have a private, multi-payer market that's disconnected from employment status (that would greatly enhance portability of insurance plans, in fact)--in fact we will have a pretty good marketplace for that in every state in a few years.