Obama’s accomplishments so far

[bearishgurl]

[quote=Zeitgeist]More accomplishments of the Obama administration:

“1 in 3 Employers Will Drop Health Benefits After ObamaCare Kicks In, Survey Finds”

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/06/07/1-in-3-employers-will-drop-health-benefits-after-obamacare-fully-kicks-in/#ixzz1OctTjWmf%5B/quote%5D

Zeitgeist, I DO believe this will come to pass. I know several people who are currently employed FT who have “employer-sponsored” health plans. Their co-pays are higher than mine, hospital deductibles are higher than mine, they have LESS “choice” than I do, their drug co-pay is higher than mine, etc. One of them has more taken out of their monthly paycheck for their share of their healthcare premium (themselves only) than the cost of my entire monthly premium! And I have a high deductible health plan (HDHP)! I don’t think some companies/non-profits are getting a good deal at all on health insurance for their employees. Since my policy was individually underwritten, my premium is partially set on the state of MY health (past and present). NOT SO with employer-sponsored health plans where the healthy are obviously subsidizing the sick (in the same group) :={

[bearishgurl]

[quote=Zeitgeist]…

“1 in 3 Employers Will Drop Health Benefits After ObamaCare Kicks In, Survey Finds”

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/06/07/1-in-3-employers-will-drop-health-benefits-after-obamacare-fully-kicks-in/#ixzz1OctTjWmf
[/quote]

For an employer, it’s w-a-a-a-a-y cheaper to pay the “penalty” of $2,000 per employee annually than provide health insurance (beginning in 2014). I predict the majority of employees will take the cash and NOT get health insurance. When they need care (emergency or otherwise), they will just take their chances that their providers will not be able to collect from them.

This is what has been going on with uninsured motorists in CA for many years who are “supposed” to have “mandatory” liability coverage. We don’t jail persons who owe fines in CA.

Whether or not an employer offers health coverage or not (or drops it) will have no effect on their turnover (if MANY employers in the same area drop coverage). Employees will just grovel and “bottom-feed” to take what they can get. Sad … but I think this is the path employees will (involuntarily) take.

[bearishgurl]

[quote=Zeitgeist]…

“1 in 3 Employers Will Drop Health Benefits After ObamaCare Kicks In, Survey Finds”

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/06/07/1-in-3-employers-will-drop-health-benefits-after-obamacare-fully-kicks-in/#ixzz1OctTjWmf
[/quote]

For an employer, it’s w-a-a-a-a-y cheaper to pay the “penalty” of $2,000 per employee annually than provide health insurance (beginning in 2014). I predict the majority of employees will take the cash and NOT get health insurance. When they need care (emergency or otherwise), they will just take their chances that their providers will not be able to collect from them.

This is what has been going on with uninsured motorists in CA for many years who are “supposed” to have “mandatory” liability coverage. We don’t jail persons who owe fines in CA.

Whether or not an employer offers health coverage or not (or drops it) will have no effect on their turnover (if MANY employers in the same area drop coverage). Employees will just grovel and “bottom-feed” to take what they can get. Sad … but I think this is the path employees will (involuntarily) take.

[bearishgurl]

[quote=Zeitgeist]…

“1 in 3 Employers Will Drop Health Benefits After ObamaCare Kicks In, Survey Finds”

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/06/07/1-in-3-employers-will-drop-health-benefits-after-obamacare-fully-kicks-in/#ixzz1OctTjWmf
[/quote]

For an employer, it’s w-a-a-a-a-y cheaper to pay the “penalty” of $2,000 per employee annually than provide health insurance (beginning in 2014). I predict the majority of employees will take the cash and NOT get health insurance. When they need care (emergency or otherwise), they will just take their chances that their providers will not be able to collect from them.

This is what has been going on with uninsured motorists in CA for many years who are “supposed” to have “mandatory” liability coverage. We don’t jail persons who owe fines in CA.

Whether or not an employer offers health coverage or not (or drops it) will have no effect on their turnover (if MANY employers in the same area drop coverage). Employees will just grovel and “bottom-feed” to take what they can get. Sad … but I think this is the path employees will (involuntarily) take.

[bearishgurl]

[quote=Zeitgeist]…

“1 in 3 Employers Will Drop Health Benefits After ObamaCare Kicks In, Survey Finds”

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/06/07/1-in-3-employers-will-drop-health-benefits-after-obamacare-fully-kicks-in/#ixzz1OctTjWmf
[/quote]

For an employer, it’s w-a-a-a-a-y cheaper to pay the “penalty” of $2,000 per employee annually than provide health insurance (beginning in 2014). I predict the majority of employees will take the cash and NOT get health insurance. When they need care (emergency or otherwise), they will just take their chances that their providers will not be able to collect from them.

This is what has been going on with uninsured motorists in CA for many years who are “supposed” to have “mandatory” liability coverage. We don’t jail persons who owe fines in CA.

Whether or not an employer offers health coverage or not (or drops it) will have no effect on their turnover (if MANY employers in the same area drop coverage). Employees will just grovel and “bottom-feed” to take what they can get. Sad … but I think this is the path employees will (involuntarily) take.

[bearishgurl]

[quote=Zeitgeist]…

“1 in 3 Employers Will Drop Health Benefits After ObamaCare Kicks In, Survey Finds”

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/06/07/1-in-3-employers-will-drop-health-benefits-after-obamacare-fully-kicks-in/#ixzz1OctTjWmf
[/quote]

For an employer, it’s w-a-a-a-a-y cheaper to pay the “penalty” of $2,000 per employee annually than provide health insurance (beginning in 2014). I predict the majority of employees will take the cash and NOT get health insurance. When they need care (emergency or otherwise), they will just take their chances that their providers will not be able to collect from them.

This is what has been going on with uninsured motorists in CA for many years who are “supposed” to have “mandatory” liability coverage. We don’t jail persons who owe fines in CA.

Whether or not an employer offers health coverage or not (or drops it) will have no effect on their turnover (if MANY employers in the same area drop coverage). Employees will just grovel and “bottom-feed” to take what they can get. Sad … but I think this is the path employees will (involuntarily) take.

[briansd1]

[quote=bearishgurl]
For an employer, it’s w-a-a-a-a-y cheaper to pay the “penalty” of $2,000 per employee annually than provide health insurance (beginning in 2014). I predict the majority of employees will take the cash and NOT get health insurance.
[/quote]

Employers don’t have to provide health insurance now.

They will be penalized for not doing so in the future. So employers will have the financial incentives to provide insurance.

[quote=bearishgurl]
This is what has been going on with uninsured motorists in CA for many years who are “supposed” to have “mandatory” liability coverage. We don’t jail persons who owe fines in CA.
[/quote]

Uninsured motorists are much less of a problem these days.

Vehicle registration is automatically canceled when a car in uninsured.

Insurance companies report electronically to the DMV.

[briansd1]

[quote=bearishgurl]
For an employer, it’s w-a-a-a-a-y cheaper to pay the “penalty” of $2,000 per employee annually than provide health insurance (beginning in 2014). I predict the majority of employees will take the cash and NOT get health insurance.
[/quote]

Employers don’t have to provide health insurance now.

They will be penalized for not doing so in the future. So employers will have the financial incentives to provide insurance.

[quote=bearishgurl]
This is what has been going on with uninsured motorists in CA for many years who are “supposed” to have “mandatory” liability coverage. We don’t jail persons who owe fines in CA.
[/quote]

Uninsured motorists are much less of a problem these days.

Vehicle registration is automatically canceled when a car in uninsured.

Insurance companies report electronically to the DMV.

[briansd1]

[quote=bearishgurl]
For an employer, it’s w-a-a-a-a-y cheaper to pay the “penalty” of $2,000 per employee annually than provide health insurance (beginning in 2014). I predict the majority of employees will take the cash and NOT get health insurance.
[/quote]

Employers don’t have to provide health insurance now.

They will be penalized for not doing so in the future. So employers will have the financial incentives to provide insurance.

[quote=bearishgurl]
This is what has been going on with uninsured motorists in CA for many years who are “supposed” to have “mandatory” liability coverage. We don’t jail persons who owe fines in CA.
[/quote]

Uninsured motorists are much less of a problem these days.

Vehicle registration is automatically canceled when a car in uninsured.

Insurance companies report electronically to the DMV.

[briansd1]

[quote=bearishgurl]
For an employer, it’s w-a-a-a-a-y cheaper to pay the “penalty” of $2,000 per employee annually than provide health insurance (beginning in 2014). I predict the majority of employees will take the cash and NOT get health insurance.
[/quote]

Employers don’t have to provide health insurance now.

They will be penalized for not doing so in the future. So employers will have the financial incentives to provide insurance.

[quote=bearishgurl]
This is what has been going on with uninsured motorists in CA for many years who are “supposed” to have “mandatory” liability coverage. We don’t jail persons who owe fines in CA.
[/quote]

Uninsured motorists are much less of a problem these days.

Vehicle registration is automatically canceled when a car in uninsured.

Insurance companies report electronically to the DMV.

[briansd1]

[quote=bearishgurl]
For an employer, it’s w-a-a-a-a-y cheaper to pay the “penalty” of $2,000 per employee annually than provide health insurance (beginning in 2014). I predict the majority of employees will take the cash and NOT get health insurance.
[/quote]

Employers don’t have to provide health insurance now.

They will be penalized for not doing so in the future. So employers will have the financial incentives to provide insurance.

[quote=bearishgurl]
This is what has been going on with uninsured motorists in CA for many years who are “supposed” to have “mandatory” liability coverage. We don’t jail persons who owe fines in CA.
[/quote]

Uninsured motorists are much less of a problem these days.

Vehicle registration is automatically canceled when a car in uninsured.

Insurance companies report electronically to the DMV.

[bearishgurl]

[quote=briansd1][quote=bearishgurl]
For an employer, it’s w-a-a-a-a-y cheaper to pay the “penalty” of $2,000 per employee annually than provide health insurance (beginning in 2014). I predict the majority of employees will take the cash and NOT get health insurance.
[/quote]

Employers don’t have to provide health insurance now.

They will be penalized for not doing so in the future. So employers will have the financial incentives to provide insurance.[/quote]

I don’t think $2,000 per employee is an “adequate enough” penalty to cause an employer (who otherwise wouldn’t or can no longer stay in business if they did) to provide health coverage to all their workers.

[quote=bearishgurl][quote=briansd1]This is what has been going on with uninsured motorists in CA for many years who are “supposed” to have “mandatory” liability coverage. We don’t jail persons who owe fines in CA.[/quote]Uninsured motorists are much less of a problem these days.[/quote]

You must not drive too much in South County. Last time I looked at the minimum liability insurance limits in Mexico, they were $3K total (property damage AND medical payments) per vehicle, assuming the Baja driver actually HAS insurance :={ There is no check of a current auto liability coverage at the border crossings on vehicles entering the US.

See this 1997 GAO letter:

http://archive.gao.gov/paprpdf1/159309.pdf

And from an older publication:

The problem of uninsured motorists is well documented in California. A 1995 zip code level survey by the California Department of Insurance found that 28 percent of drivers in that state were uninsured, totaling roughly 5.8 million vehicles statewide. In Los Angeles County, the
figure was 37 percent, and in San Francisco it was nearly 33 percent. Certain zip codes had exceptionally high-uninsured motorist rates. Some areas of Oakland and south central Los Angeles, for instance, had an uninsured motorist rate over 60 percent, while other zip codes in Los Angeles and San Diego had rates in excess of 90 percent.

(emphasis added)

see pg 21: http://www.house.gov/jec/tort/cities/cities.pdf

How has this problem changed since 1998?

[quote=briansd1]Vehicle registration is automatically canceled when a car in uninsured.[/quote]

So what. This doesn’t prevent their owner(s) from getting in and driving. “Uninsured motorists” are not on law enforcement “hot lists” like stolen vehicles are. They have enough to do without policing uninsured motorists.

[quote=briansd1]Insurance companies report electronically to the DMV.[/quote]

And …?

[bearishgurl]

[quote=briansd1][quote=bearishgurl]
For an employer, it’s w-a-a-a-a-y cheaper to pay the “penalty” of $2,000 per employee annually than provide health insurance (beginning in 2014). I predict the majority of employees will take the cash and NOT get health insurance.
[/quote]

Employers don’t have to provide health insurance now.

They will be penalized for not doing so in the future. So employers will have the financial incentives to provide insurance.[/quote]

I don’t think $2,000 per employee is an “adequate enough” penalty to cause an employer (who otherwise wouldn’t or can no longer stay in business if they did) to provide health coverage to all their workers.

[quote=bearishgurl][quote=briansd1]This is what has been going on with uninsured motorists in CA for many years who are “supposed” to have “mandatory” liability coverage. We don’t jail persons who owe fines in CA.[/quote]Uninsured motorists are much less of a problem these days.[/quote]

You must not drive too much in South County. Last time I looked at the minimum liability insurance limits in Mexico, they were $3K total (property damage AND medical payments) per vehicle, assuming the Baja driver actually HAS insurance :={ There is no check of a current auto liability coverage at the border crossings on vehicles entering the US.

See this 1997 GAO letter:

http://archive.gao.gov/paprpdf1/159309.pdf

And from an older publication:

The problem of uninsured motorists is well documented in California. A 1995 zip code level survey by the California Department of Insurance found that 28 percent of drivers in that state were uninsured, totaling roughly 5.8 million vehicles statewide. In Los Angeles County, the
figure was 37 percent, and in San Francisco it was nearly 33 percent. Certain zip codes had exceptionally high-uninsured motorist rates. Some areas of Oakland and south central Los Angeles, for instance, had an uninsured motorist rate over 60 percent, while other zip codes in Los Angeles and San Diego had rates in excess of 90 percent.

(emphasis added)

see pg 21: http://www.house.gov/jec/tort/cities/cities.pdf

How has this problem changed since 1998?

[quote=briansd1]Vehicle registration is automatically canceled when a car in uninsured.[/quote]

So what. This doesn’t prevent their owner(s) from getting in and driving. “Uninsured motorists” are not on law enforcement “hot lists” like stolen vehicles are. They have enough to do without policing uninsured motorists.

[quote=briansd1]Insurance companies report electronically to the DMV.[/quote]

And …?

[bearishgurl]

[quote=briansd1][quote=bearishgurl]
For an employer, it’s w-a-a-a-a-y cheaper to pay the “penalty” of $2,000 per employee annually than provide health insurance (beginning in 2014). I predict the majority of employees will take the cash and NOT get health insurance.
[/quote]

Employers don’t have to provide health insurance now.

They will be penalized for not doing so in the future. So employers will have the financial incentives to provide insurance.[/quote]

I don’t think $2,000 per employee is an “adequate enough” penalty to cause an employer (who otherwise wouldn’t or can no longer stay in business if they did) to provide health coverage to all their workers.

[quote=bearishgurl][quote=briansd1]This is what has been going on with uninsured motorists in CA for many years who are “supposed” to have “mandatory” liability coverage. We don’t jail persons who owe fines in CA.[/quote]Uninsured motorists are much less of a problem these days.[/quote]

You must not drive too much in South County. Last time I looked at the minimum liability insurance limits in Mexico, they were $3K total (property damage AND medical payments) per vehicle, assuming the Baja driver actually HAS insurance :={ There is no check of a current auto liability coverage at the border crossings on vehicles entering the US.

See this 1997 GAO letter:

http://archive.gao.gov/paprpdf1/159309.pdf

And from an older publication:

The problem of uninsured motorists is well documented in California. A 1995 zip code level survey by the California Department of Insurance found that 28 percent of drivers in that state were uninsured, totaling roughly 5.8 million vehicles statewide. In Los Angeles County, the
figure was 37 percent, and in San Francisco it was nearly 33 percent. Certain zip codes had exceptionally high-uninsured motorist rates. Some areas of Oakland and south central Los Angeles, for instance, had an uninsured motorist rate over 60 percent, while other zip codes in Los Angeles and San Diego had rates in excess of 90 percent.

(emphasis added)

see pg 21: http://www.house.gov/jec/tort/cities/cities.pdf

How has this problem changed since 1998?

[quote=briansd1]Vehicle registration is automatically canceled when a car in uninsured.[/quote]

So what. This doesn’t prevent their owner(s) from getting in and driving. “Uninsured motorists” are not on law enforcement “hot lists” like stolen vehicles are. They have enough to do without policing uninsured motorists.

[quote=briansd1]Insurance companies report electronically to the DMV.[/quote]

And …?

[bearishgurl]

[quote=briansd1][quote=bearishgurl]
For an employer, it’s w-a-a-a-a-y cheaper to pay the “penalty” of $2,000 per employee annually than provide health insurance (beginning in 2014). I predict the majority of employees will take the cash and NOT get health insurance.
[/quote]

Employers don’t have to provide health insurance now.

They will be penalized for not doing so in the future. So employers will have the financial incentives to provide insurance.[/quote]

I don’t think $2,000 per employee is an “adequate enough” penalty to cause an employer (who otherwise wouldn’t or can no longer stay in business if they did) to provide health coverage to all their workers.

[quote=bearishgurl][quote=briansd1]This is what has been going on with uninsured motorists in CA for many years who are “supposed” to have “mandatory” liability coverage. We don’t jail persons who owe fines in CA.[/quote]Uninsured motorists are much less of a problem these days.[/quote]

You must not drive too much in South County. Last time I looked at the minimum liability insurance limits in Mexico, they were $3K total (property damage AND medical payments) per vehicle, assuming the Baja driver actually HAS insurance :={ There is no check of a current auto liability coverage at the border crossings on vehicles entering the US.

See this 1997 GAO letter:

http://archive.gao.gov/paprpdf1/159309.pdf

And from an older publication:

The problem of uninsured motorists is well documented in California. A 1995 zip code level survey by the California Department of Insurance found that 28 percent of drivers in that state were uninsured, totaling roughly 5.8 million vehicles statewide. In Los Angeles County, the
figure was 37 percent, and in San Francisco it was nearly 33 percent. Certain zip codes had exceptionally high-uninsured motorist rates. Some areas of Oakland and south central Los Angeles, for instance, had an uninsured motorist rate over 60 percent, while other zip codes in Los Angeles and San Diego had rates in excess of 90 percent.

(emphasis added)

see pg 21: http://www.house.gov/jec/tort/cities/cities.pdf

How has this problem changed since 1998?

[quote=briansd1]Vehicle registration is automatically canceled when a car in uninsured.[/quote]

So what. This doesn’t prevent their owner(s) from getting in and driving. “Uninsured motorists” are not on law enforcement “hot lists” like stolen vehicles are. They have enough to do without policing uninsured motorists.

[quote=briansd1]Insurance companies report electronically to the DMV.[/quote]

And …?

[Author]

Posts