General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsObamacare Could Lead To 33% More New Businesses Over The Next Few Years
Obamacare Could Lead To 33% More New Businesses Over The Next Few Years
Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/how-obamacare-could-create-thousands-of-new-entrepreneurs-2013-5#ixzz2g7QmPdDZ
Despite objections by businesses to parts of the Affordable Care Act, there could be as many as 33% more new small businesses over the next few years as a result of the law, reports the WSJ. The Kauffman-RAND Institute for Entrepreneurship Public Policy calculated the estimate.
Why the projected increase?
A major barrier that keeps people, especially those with pre-existing conditions, from starting their own business is the ability to get robust and affordable health insurance. People seek out and keep corporate jobs, not because they want to, but because they feel like they have to. Entrepreneurs call the phenomenon "entrepreneurship lock."
The Affordable Care Act could potentially solve that by offering people who start businesses coverage through state- or federally-run marketplaces for insurance (exchanges).
To see that full 33% increase in new businesses, coverage from exchanges would have to be equivalent to that from corporate plans, which is unlikely in the short run.
For young people, the idea of being unable to pay for massive medical bills seems distant and unlikely. But many older people have seen it in others or experienced it themselves, or have dependents that they have to worry about.
Without a significant savings cushion, a luxury many people don't have, leaving a safe corporate job with benefits just doesn't seem like an option.
Great business ideas aren't limited to the affluent or the young, and though it might take a while to play out, this looks like an unsung benefit of the new health care legislation.
mindwalker_i
(4,407 posts)for Republicans. It keeps corporations from having competition.
ErikJ
(6,335 posts)Last edited Fri Sep 27, 2013, 03:49 PM - Edit history (1)
I think thats why they like the employee based health care system. It keeps their employees trapped into loyalty. ANd it keeps them from starting their own business to compete against them. Not any more though. HAHAHA
mindwalker_i
(4,407 posts)They kind of fucked up there.
Skinner
(63,645 posts)I've been getting health care from my wife's job, and unfortunately it's about to end. I'm actually a little worried that we might not be able to get coverage for our family to get us to the end of the year when Obamacare kicks in.
Having only two other employees, it is virtually impossible to get half-decent health care. Obamacare is going to make it much easier.
sharp_stick
(14,400 posts)BKH70041
(961 posts)Still I have a family (4 of us) for which I need to have coverage. My former insurance ended about a month ago, so I got a catastrophic policy to cover for the major things until Jan 1st. It's like a $25,000 deductible, but only $500 for 4 months. I just figure if something bad does happen that runs into the $100's of thousands, at least I've got something. You might want to check and see if that's available in your area.
ErikJ
(6,335 posts)I had my old policy changed to Obamacare compatible spring 2012. I was paying $220 a month and now paying $120 a month with a $10,000 deductible. It gives me free physicals and cancer screenings though. I just had a physlical last week with a couple of shots and blood test for free. They tell me that that policy will go away on Jan. 1st and my new real Obama policy kicks in. I think it will be more expensive but it will be much better in case I need it with all the new OC benefits. In case I need it it will have a max. out of pocket of about $4000 a year with no lifetime caps. etc.
Trekologer
(997 posts)An annual physical and most lab work is covered with no copay in covered with all plans, even the lowest level (bronze). My physical last year, including all of the lab work, was billed at over $1,200 (the insurance plan's negotiated rate was far, far less). And I'm in fine health.
Every time someone here complains that the Affordable Care Act only provides insurance, not health care, they're completely wrong. Preventative care is vital to keeping individuals healthy and healthcare costs down and it is 100% covered now.
peacebird
(14,195 posts)Into a "diagnostic" procedure, so was not covered. For example, colonoscopy is preventive but if they pull out a polyp it becomes diagnostic so it costs me money. I think this was because our megacorp "self insured" using BC/BS.
Is that loophole fixed in the ACA?
steve2470
(37,457 posts)They are RW as all fuck, but at least you can get small business health insurance through them. Mine is Aetna (greedy bastards who spent $7M lobbying Congress).
Just a thought. HTH.
grahamhgreen
(15,741 posts)Th1onein
(8,514 posts)There are going to be people who abuse ANY system, including Obamacare. That doesn't mean that it doesn't help most people.
grahamhgreen
(15,741 posts)Zorra
(27,670 posts)of a short process that leads to universal public healthcare.
And the end of the private health insurance company vultures.
I especially want United Healthcare to go bankrupt in the worst way. Bunch of legalized liars, frauds, thieves, and killers they are.
Th1onein
(8,514 posts)mwooldri
(10,303 posts)Now they're over 20 years old and not in the best of shape... but nevertheless they are Cadillacs.
GOP keeps saying obamacare will kill businesses.They can't be lying could them
treestar
(82,383 posts)Has got to help businesses. They can quit worrying about/paying for it and hire more people.
duffyduff
(3,251 posts)Getting rid of employer-paid insurance is only good if there is single-payer. However, this ACA is a disaster waiting to happen because NOBODY will be able to afford to use the exchanges. And that is probably the point, on top of the fact it is an excuse for companies to abolish their health insurance plans. Look at the disaster of pensions/401(k)s, and you know where this is headed.
You DO realize that the "exchanges" have income levels that are pathetically inadequate, for if people can afford the outrageous monthly premiums (and remember for singles especially, premiums in large businesses or public employment are very small or even zero) and MOST will NOT, they definitely cannot afford the high deductibles. The "subsidies" are not going to help much if you have to pay this premium every month when you NEED the money for necessities like rent, food, etc.
Medicaid isn't insurance, and if you are over 55, the government can seize your assets upon your death to pay the debt. Lots of luck getting a doctor who will see you.
ACA is typical Washington legislation. It ends up hurting more than it helps because it's the lobbyists who wrote the legislation.
treestar
(82,383 posts)And it is progress. Single payer or nothing is not going to work; it would be decades before anything changed. The people who don't have insurance now are likely the lower paid, not the higher paid. Those who already have insurance with an employer are the ones who didn't care and didn't need Obamacare. They're the ones crying about "government takeover" (or the right wing ones are).
KrazyinKS
(291 posts)Is that what scares them? I suppose the reasons are complex, but a change in the health care system will lead to a lot more personal freedom, like starting your own business and creating more competition in the marketplace. We all know big business does not like competition. That I think is one of the side effects that never seems to get discussed much. They don't want the general population to realize that.
BKH70041
(961 posts)The banks aren't lending. A whole bunch of the larger banks aren't even lending on new home construction, and that's much more secure of a risk than a start up business. I'll be building a new home over the next 9 months and the number of banks who are lending are few.
So at this point, and over the course of the next several years, it's going to take capital to start up and for there to be sufficient savings set aside until business gets moving. That usually takes 2 or 3 years, and most people just can't hold out that long.
SHRED
(28,136 posts)TheKentuckian
(25,023 posts)top 20% at very best. Probably more like the top 5%. This will help a few older people with significant savings and extensive credit to take a few risks but most of us are as chained to the paychecks as we are to health care or they are already taking the risks and will have a floor put in under them, but probably more of us are tied to the checks than the insurance. Coverage is important but income is beyond critical when the majority is essentially paycheck to paycheck.
Sorry, but substantially though not completely this is just another in a seemingly infinite parade of Horatio Hornblower sales jobs. A bootstrap s tale.
It will help but 33% is a stretch. We're becoming just another denomination of a false, secular, state religion by the day.
leftstreet
(36,106 posts)hedgehog
(36,286 posts)because they or a dependent have a pre-existing condition!
stopwastingmymoney
(2,041 posts)I know several people in their late 50's who would love to retire but don't because they need the health insurance. I think we'll see a substantial number of early retirees, opening up jobs for younger people who really need them.
Donald Ian Rankin
(13,598 posts)This is an entirely made-up number pulled out of thin air. Using the word "calculated" is stretching it, to be honest.
madrchsod
(58,162 posts)we could`t afford private insurance on our family so my wife had to keep her full time job. there was`t anyway we could expand with her working full time. today that would`t be the case.