Indy Lurker
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Feb-22-08 09:10 AM
Original message |
Question about health care plans |
|
Edited on Fri Feb-22-08 09:15 AM by Indy Lurker
Both Obama and Hillary say you can keep the insurance you have.
My question is why would most companies continue to offer the same insurance if they dump employees off to a government plan.
ON EDIT: This would seem most likely for low income people. A company could offer to pay the sliding scale premium for the government plan, and probably save $3000 per employee.
|
Lasher
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Feb-22-08 09:36 AM
Response to Original message |
1. If you're talking about employer provided healthcare it's not up to them. |
|
Not unless they would enact some measure that would prohibit employers from eliminating or reducing employee/retiree medical benefits. Right now employers are moving to high deductible catastrophic-only policies, coupled with healthcare savings accounts. In these plans the goal is to have the employee bear all costs, and the employer none.
|
Indy Lurker
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Feb-22-08 12:13 PM
Response to Reply #1 |
|
I have to pay about $3500 per year, and my company puts in $4000 per year, this give me a $25 office visits, $1000 deducible and 20% copay to an out of pocket max of $3000 for hospital type stuff (plus the $1000 deducible)
I could see our company (and many others) dropping all health care, and offering to pay employees a monthly amount to cover a portion of the premiums of the government program (assuming it is less than their paying now) This would even allow the company to cut out an HR person, who does all the medical stuff.
And since the premiums of the government plan is based on income, the less employees are paid, the less their health care will cost the company (if they are paying out a sum of money equal to the premiums)
Hope my point makes sense.
|
rinsd
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Feb-22-08 12:41 PM
Response to Reply #1 |
4. Companies would be allowed in on the public plans. |
|
From Hillary's plan
2) A Choice of Health Plan Options: Businesses, employees, and the uninsured will have the option of buying group insurance through a new Health Choices Menu. This Menu will give all Americans the same set of insurance options that their Member of Congress has. Without creating new bureaucracy, the Menu will be part of the Federal Employee Health Benefit Program (FEHBP), which includes numerous, high-quality private health insurance options. The Health Choices Menu will have the purchasing power of millions of Americans in securing high-quality and affordable insurance. States will also have the option of banding together to offer the same type of choices in a region of the country if they wish. The benefits will be as good as those offered to Members of Congress. Such coverage includes mental health parity, and many plans offer dental coverage. In addition, as a condition of doing business with the federal government, insurers must cover highpriority preventive services that experts agree are proven and effective. This focus on prevention will improve health and lower costs in the long run.
Obama has something similar.
|
rinsd
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Feb-22-08 12:39 PM
Response to Original message |
3. That's exactly the plan. Swell the rolls of the public plans till they become dominant. |
|
You could have defacto single payer thru "free market" mechanisms.
|
Indy Lurker
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Feb-22-08 01:59 PM
Response to Reply #3 |
|
I guess my concern is that either plan was banking on seeing the same amount of dollars from employers.
|
democrattotheend
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Feb-22-08 02:02 PM
Response to Original message |
6. Obama's plan has penalties for employers who don't provide coverage |
|
Not sure about Clinton's plan.
|
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Wed Apr 24th 2024, 12:37 PM
Response to Original message |