One in eight. Eliminating employer health care plans

Jroc

יעקב כהן
Oct 19, 2010
19,815
6,469
390
Michigan
One in eight small businesses get insurance cancellations after ObamaCare passage

Among the most striking of NFIB’s findings was the number of employer health insurance plans that have been or will be eliminated since PPACA’s passage — 14 percent, or one in eight. Eliminating employer health care plans “is the first major consequence of PPACA that small-business owners likely feel,” the report said.
“We are not aware of any data suggesting we’ve had turnover anywhere near this level in the past,” said William J. Dennis, a senior research fellow at the National Federation for Independent Business.
The NFIB study also found 20 percent of small employers expect to significantly change their benefit packages the next time they renew their health insurance plans. Almost all of them expected to see diminished benefits, increased employee costs, or both.


One in eight small businesses get insurance cancellations after ObamaCare passage « Hot Air
 
Pretty much the same rate of decline of employer health care coverage as when Bush was president and before Health Care Reform.
 
How many had health care plans before Obama? And don't say "All of them".
 
How many had health care plans before Obama? And don't say "All of them".

Are you a complete idiot?

Never mind, I know the answer.

This was a survey of businesses with health insurance what they are doing as a result of Obamacare. That means that all of them had insurance before, and 12% of them eliminated it because of the new costs.
 

Which is really what needs to happen. This has been in the cards for a long time, and while it may be painful, it could point us toward a real solution. Pushing us all into dependency on our employers for our health care was a horrible idea in the first place, and in general, the low deductible, high premium insurance policy just isn't viable.

But what you're missing is that Obamacare is actually intent on reversing this trend. It's designed to keep people dependent on their employers - or better yet (from the state's point of view) the government - for the most crucial need they have, their very health.

Health care 'reform', like pretty much any government agenda these days, is about controlling people first and foremost. The insurance industry lobbied vigorously to be 'at the table' and in on whatever the state cooks up. But the last priority is the welfare (and most especially, the freedom) of the average citizen. We are pawns in their corporatist game and little more.
 
Last edited:

Which is really what needs to happen. This has been in the cards for a long time, and while it may be painful, it could point us toward a real solution. Pushing us all into dependency on our employers for our health care was a horrible idea in the first place, and in general, the low deductible, high premium insurance policy just isn't viable.

But what you're missing is that Obamacare is actually intent on reversing this trend. It's designed to keep people dependent on their employers - or better yet (from the state's point of view) the government - for the most crucial need they have, their very health.

Health care 'reform', like pretty much any government agenda these days, is about controlling people first and foremost. The insurance industry lobbied vigorously to be 'at the table' and in on whatever the state cooks up. But the last priority is the welfare (and most especially, the freedom) of the average citizen. We are pawns in their corporatist game and little more.

The health insurance companies will be out of buisness if Obama gets his way.:eusa_whistle:
 
The health insurance companies will be out of buisness if Obama gets his way.:eusa_whistle:

I suppose neither of us knows his personal intent for sure, but his actions as president speak pretty clearly. He's bent over backwards to keep the health insurance companies in business - and to keep them inserted as middlemen in every single health care transaction. The individual mandate actually expands their control over health care delivery making it illegal for us to refuse to purchase their 'service'.

The notion that Obamacare is an attack on the health insurance industry is ludicrous. It's a bailout, and a 'merger' between the insurance industry and the federal government. The interests of 'the people' have been traded away in effecting that deal. Worse, we've furthered the establishment of corporatism as our national charter.
 
The health insurance companies will be out of buisness if Obama gets his way.:eusa_whistle:

I suppose neither of us knows his personal intent for sure, but his actions as president speak pretty clearly. He's bent over backwards to keep the health insurance companies in business - and to keep them inserted as middlemen in every single health care transaction. The individual mandate actually expands their control over health care delivery making it illegal for us to refuse to purchase their 'service'.

The notion that Obamacare is an attack on the health insurance industry is ludicrous. It's a bailout, and a 'merger' between the insurance industry and the federal government. The interests of 'the people' have been traded away in effecting that deal. Worse, we've furthered the establishment of corporatism as our national charter.

You can think of anyway you want, but the fact is if insurance companies can't make money is health care Buisness, they just get out of the business. They won't be able to make money with all the new mandates coming down the pike
 
Funny Jroc..you didn't post shit about companies removing other benefits. Like Pensions. Obamacare again?

Now that Unions have been smashed..look forward to low wages and no benefits.
 
The health insurance companies will be out of buisness if Obama gets his way.:eusa_whistle:

I suppose neither of us knows his personal intent for sure, but his actions as president speak pretty clearly. He's bent over backwards to keep the health insurance companies in business - and to keep them inserted as middlemen in every single health care transaction. The individual mandate actually expands their control over health care delivery making it illegal for us to refuse to purchase their 'service'.

The notion that Obamacare is an attack on the health insurance industry is ludicrous. It's a bailout, and a 'merger' between the insurance industry and the federal government. The interests of 'the people' have been traded away in effecting that deal. Worse, we've furthered the establishment of corporatism as our national charter.

You can think of anyway you want, but the fact is if insurance companies can't make money is health care Buisness, they just get out of the business. They won't be able to make money with all the new mandates coming down the pike

They will just not be able to make as much money.
They along with everyone else must learn to live with less.
 
Funny Jroc..you didn't post shit about companies removing other benefits. Like Pensions. Obamacare again?

Now that Unions have been smashed..look forward to low wages and no benefits.

And no bathroom breaks....
 
I don't have the time to read the whole thing carefully right now, but the NFIB survey says:

The number of small employers offering employee health insurance has not changed appreciably in the last 12 months, the post-PPACA passage time frame. About 1 percent of those who now offer health insurance claim that they added it as an employee benefit within the last year (Q. 3). In contrast, 4 percent of those now without employee health insurance dropped the benefit in the same time frame (Q. 3a). These changes are relatively small, a net decline of about 2 percentage points over a 12-month period. The numbers are also subject to sampling error. Still, a constant change of that magnitude over an extended period leads to significant erosion of employer provided health insurance. And, that is what has occurred over the past decade. Both the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey (MEPS) and the Kaiser Family Foundation survey document declines of about 10 percentage points in 10 years or about one-half million firms.5 The data presented here document continuation of the longer-term trend.

Small-business owners forecast no major changes in the number of small firms offering employee health insurance in the next year. Thirty-four (34) percent of small employers say that it is “very likely” that they will offer the benefit next year at this time with another 10 percent saying they are “somewhat likely” (Q. 6). In comparison, 37 percent report they are “not at all likely” and another 18 percent are “not too likely”. Combining percentages of the “likely” group (44%) and the “not likely” group (55%) yields a division almost identical to the current 42 – 58 percent offer/not offer split.

Not only should we expect no change in health insurance offers during the next year on a net basis (percent adopting minus percent dropping), we should also expect virtually no change on an individual per firm basis. Those who currently offer employee health insurance are likely to have the benefit 12 months from now and those not offering employee health insurance are not likely to offer it in the coming 12 months. However, the former possess more unwavering intentions than do the latter. Seventy-nine (79) percent of those currently offering insurance say that it is “very likely” they will still offer the benefit next year at this time while another 9 percent say that it is “somewhat likely” (Table 1). That leaves 12 percent who may drop health insurance, though just 2 percent indicate that having the benefit next year is “not at all likely”.

Not quite as alarmist as the PR.
 
It also looks like they're rather excited about the new possibilities offered by the SHOP exchanges (without explicitly saying that):

While defined contribution retirement plans have been the norm for several years and continue to increase relative to defined benefit plans, the same type of innovation has failed to reach the financing of health insurance. There are two primary reasons for that failure. The first is that the individual market in health insurance has not functioned well, making it unattractive for all but those without alternatives. There are many reasons why this has been so, but the effect has generally been to tie employees to an employer plan whenever possible.

The second reason is exclusion from taxable income. The employer’s contribution for employee health insurance is excluded from the employee’s income for tax purposes. However, if an employer contributes to help an employee purchase health insurance in the individual market, the employer’s contribution is counted as employee income for tax purposes.

With exchanges making the individual market more viable for many (removing the first barrier to defined contribution-type health insurance), a potential way of changing small-business owner involvement in employee health insurance is to change the exclusion of employer contributions that help employees purchase health insurance in the individual market (exchange). If those contributions were treated the same way employer contributions for employer-sponsored health insurance are treated, additional employers would be encouraged to contribute to employee purchases and employees would be encouraged to locate plans more attuned to their personal needs. Equal tax treatment therefore offers the second leg to a workable new option for both employers and employees.21

The survey questionnaire described (see, Q. 12 for the description) the defined contribution-type plan as a new option for financing employee health insurance without mentioning the term “defined contribution”. The purpose of the omission was to avoid confusion with defined benefit pension plans. Those who currently offer were asked, if available, how likely they would be to consider substituting this “new option” for their current health insurance plan. Twenty-two (22) percent say that they are “very likely” to consider the change and another 38 percent say that they are “somewhat likely”. Just 38 percent express little or no interest. The question was phrased differently for those who do not offer. It asked if they would consider participating or contributing if such a plan were available. Thirteen (13) percent say that they are “very likely” and another 42 percent say they are “somewhat likely” to participate. Forty-three (43) percent report little or no interest. In sum, 57 percent of small employers show an interest in possibly participating in defined contribution-type employee health insurance, though just 17 percent say that they are “very likely” to do so (Q. 12).
 
"The health insurance companies will be out of buisness if Obama gets his way."

Good. You pay in premium after premium and when you have a claim they have the right to sit down and deny you. What's the point? When you get old they dont want you anymore so this country CANNOT say they value life. If you value life, you TAKE CARE of your SENIORS and your NEWBORNS otherwise dont say you value life. Hypocrites.
 
"The health insurance companies will be out of buisness if Obama gets his way."

Good. You pay in premium after premium and when you have a claim they have the right to sit down and deny you. What's the point? When you get old they dont want you anymore so this country CANNOT say they value life. If you value life, you TAKE CARE of your SENIORS and your NEWBORNS otherwise dont say you value life. Hypocrites.

Maybe just maybe you should read your coverage. :lol::lol:
 
I say STICK it to the insurance companies. I am fine with No obama care but the system we have now ISNT WORKING except if you are a wealthy elitist person. Prices need to come down. Good bye insurance companies. Join the unemployment lines.
 
I say STICK it to the insurance companies. I am fine with No obama care but the system we have now ISNT WORKING except if you are a wealthy elitist person. Prices need to come down. Good bye insurance companies. Join the unemployment lines.

I understand the frustration.

However if the insurance was allowed to act like insurance it would not cost so much.

But we insist it cover this, it cover that etc etc.

The dem plan AKA obumblecare makes it worse. Why do think all those waivers to cronies are being handed out. To hide the fact that 300% premium increases would be necessary.
 

Forum List

Back
Top