OT: Obamacare… Don’t say we didn’t warn you…

[Coronita]

As many of you predicted… (SD Realtor, I think you win the most accurate prediction evar on this one!)

The implications of this on your future healthcare costs is left as an exercise to the reader….

Surprised? You shouldn’t be… This is/was a “no-shit-shirlock” that companies would do this….And now that the domino has fallen, you can bet other companies are going to follow suit…

Plan well my friends, if you think your insurance costs are high now, you ain’t seen nothing yet…

—————————————

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-09-09/ge-to-ibm-ending-retiree-health-plans-in-historic-shift.html

GE to IBM Ending Retiree Health Plans Adds to Taxpayer Burden

America’s biggest employers, from GE to IBM, are increasingly moving retirees to insurance exchanges where they select their own health plans, an historic shift that could push more costs onto U.S. taxpayers.

Time Warner Inc. (TWX) yesterday said it would steer retired workers toward a privately run exchange, days after a similar announcement by International Business Machines Corp. General Electric Co. (GE) last year said it, too, would curb benefits in a move that may send some former employees to the public insurance exchanges created under the 2010 Affordable Care Act.
General Electric said last year that it would close its retiree plan to new entrants starting Jan. 1, 2015.

While retiree health benefits have been shrinking for years, the newest cutbacks may quickly become the norm. About 44 percent of companies plan to stop administering health plans for their former workers over the next two years, a survey last month by consultant Towers Watson & Co. (TW) found. Retirees are concerned their costs may rise, while analysts predict benefits will decline in some cases.
“Things are going to change dramatically,” said Ron Fontanetta, a partner at New York-based Towers Watson, which advises GE and other large companies. “Over the next two to three years, we see a much more aggressive rethinking of what employers are going to provide.”

[spdrun]

I personally hope that we’ll move to ONLY exchanges within ten years, meaning that insurance will end up 100% divorced from employment status, whom you retired from, etc. Insurance being tied to employment is a historical mistake (it was an end-run around WW II-era wage freezes) that should be corrected ASAP.

[SK in CV]

Your implication in your lead is wrong. This isn’t a cut to benefits. It’s a shift in coverage. Says right in the article “It does not reduce our costs.”. Large companies have been cutting retiree healthcare benefits for more than a decade. This move expands retirees choices. For most people, exchange rates will be lower than those available in the private market.

[The-Shoveler]

When it became clear that Obama was not going to get the for profit insurance companies out of the picture they should have dumped the affordable healthcare act.

This will end up much worse than doing nothing,
(You might want to check if your company will cover your spouse and kids next year).

The only way this is going to work is if we get a system like the UK has IMHO.

[scaredyclassic]

so often, doing something is worse than doing nothing.

The Tao abides in non-action,
Yet nothing is left undone.
If kings and lords observed this,
The ten thousand things would develop naturally.
If they still desired to act,
They would return to the simplicity of formless substance.
Without form there is no desire.
Without desire there is tranquillity.
In this way all things would be at peace.

i think what laotzu is saying is probably Obama should’vebnleft the health care situation, screwed up as it was, alone.

Probably congress should consult the Tao Te Ching beforemaking any big movesfrom here on out…

[scaredyclassic]

Why are people starving?
Because the rulers eat up the money in taxes.
Therefore the people are starving.
Why are the people rebellious?
Because the rulers interfere too much.
Therefore they are rebellious.

Why do people think so little of death?
Because the rulers demand too much of life.
Therefore the people take life lightly.

Having to live on, one knows better than to value life too much.

lao tzu, old school eastern politicla philosophy. sounds kinda fresh, doesnt it?

[Coronita]

[quote=SK in CV]Your implication in your lead is wrong. This isn’t a cut to benefits. It’s a shift in coverage. Says right in the article “It does not reduce our costs.”. Large companies have been cutting retiree healthcare benefits for more than a decade. This move expands retirees choices. For most people, exchange rates will be lower than those available in the private market.[/quote]

Oh please. It’s going to cut benefits. Retirees are going to pay more for the same level of coverage. It also shifts part of the burden onto taxpayers….

You either pay more for the same coverage, or you pay the same as before and get less coverage…. Same thing….

It’s starting with retirees. But I guarantee you this will be rolled out to all non-retirees to. Terrible ..Absolutely terrible….

Well that’s it…When my health fails, I don’t want to put up with this insurance shit and health circus…Looks like I’ll be retiring early..permanently.
Good news that my kid will end up being pretty wealthy at a pretty young age!

That or Canada…. Looks pretty interesting these days, ey!

[scaredyclassic]

58

The government that seems the most unwise,
Oft goodness to the people best supplies;
That which is meddling, touching everything,
Will work but ill, and disappointment bring.

Misery!–happiness is to be found by its side! Happiness!–misery
lurks beneath it! Who knows what either will come to in the end?

Shall we then dispense with correction? The (method of) correction
shall by a turn become distortion, and the good in it shall by a turn
become evil. The delusion of the people (on this point) has indeed
subsisted for a long time.

Therefore the sage is (like) a square which cuts no one (with its
angles); (like) a corner which injures no one (with its sharpness).
He is straightforward, but allows himself no license; he is bright,
but does not dazzle.

lao tzu. over 2000 years ago…

[SK in CV]

[quote=flu]

Oh please. It’s going to cut benefits. Retirees are going to pay more for the same level of coverage. It also shifts part of the burden onto taxpayers….

You either pay more for the same coverage, or you pay the same as before and get less coverage…. Same thing….

It’s starting with retirees. But I guarantee you this will be rolled out to all non-retirees to. Terrible ..Absolutely terrible….[/quote]

I rarely take the side of big employers, but if an employer’s cost for health care benefits go up, employees are getting a raise. If an employer passes on those higher health care costs to employees, that is not a cut in pay. In this case, the costs being paid by the former employer are not going down. The former employee is now burdened with (and conversely the benefits of) changes in health care costs.

One of the worst things that ever happened to employees in this country is linking insurance with employment. If this helps to de-link the two, that’s a good thing, not a bad thing. It will (and already has) help reduce the velocity of health care spending cost increases.

[scaredyclassic]

wont there be winners and losers?

[bearishgurl]

I figured thousands of companies with 50 or less workers would elect to give smallish raises and dump their employees on the exchanges. Obviously not for 2014 (since they now don’t have to comply with the HCRA for another year) but certainly for 2015 and beyond.

As for me, I’ve changed my tune. I was pretty distressed back at the end of June when I got a letter from my longtime carrier, Aetna, that they were leaving CA’s individual market and dropping ~50K CA policies (including mine) on 12/31/13. Since then, I’ve scheduled several “preventative care” appts (which are “free” or nearly free with my plan) and have 2-3 more appts to go before EOY. I was worried that I would be dumped into a plan on the state’s exchange where I couldn’t see my regular providers anymore (some of the BEST drs in SD). They have all assured me that this will not be the case.

Since then, I have done some preliminary research on coveredca.com. However sketchy the info that is avail on there now, the tax credits based upon adjusted gross income and the premiums which are on there now are likely close to an accurate representation of what they will be, at least in 2014. (I may no longer be a resident of CA in 2015 and I checked the exchange websites of the two states I am considering relocating to and their premiums are approx. $100 – $150 mo less for me than the CA exchange for the Gold and Platinum plans, respectively.)

Right now with my guaranteed retiree healthcare allowance, I am out $93 mo for an Aetna Advantage HDHP ($5000/3000). For 2014, it appears from coveredca.com that I may qualify for an “Enhanced Silver” plan ($2000/$2350). In that case, my out-of-pocket mo premium will only be ~$80. This plan has the same coverage as a “Platinum Plan.”

The above cost of my 2014 premium is due to the tax credit I will get when signing up on the exchange plus my retiree healthcare allowance.

It appears that the two carriers for Covered CA’s PPO plans are going to be Anthem Blue Cross and Blue Shield of CA but we don’t yet know which one will be administering which plan.

If it goes down in 2014 that I am out of pocket $13 LESS for my mo premium in 2014, get more comprehensive coverage and get to keep my longtime SD providers, I won’t be complaining.

We’ll see what happens. In any case, I now have no choice but to sign up on the exchange come October.

[Anonymous]

[quote=SK in CV]One of the worst things that ever happened to employees in this country is linking insurance with employment.[/quote]

Agreed.

And one of the other big problems with employee compensation is linking retirement income to former employers, which is the real issue in the OP article, and the root cause of many other issues.

[bearishgurl]

[quote=6packscaredy] . . . Probably congress should consult the Tao Te Ching beforemaking any big movesfrom here on out…[/quote]

I agree, scaredy …

I’m also wondering if the HCRA will end up blowing up in 2-3 years when small biz (<=50 employees) starts dumping their employees on state exchanges en masse.

[bearishgurl]

[quote=flu][quote=SK in CV]Your implication in your lead is wrong. This isn’t a cut to benefits. It’s a shift in coverage. Says right in the article “It does not reduce our costs.”. Large companies have been cutting retiree healthcare benefits for more than a decade. This move expands retirees choices. For most people, exchange rates will be lower than those available in the private market.[/quote]

Oh please. It’s going to cut benefits. Retirees are going to pay more for the same level of coverage. It also shifts part of the burden onto taxpayers….

You either pay more for the same coverage, or you pay the same as before and get less coverage…. Same thing….

It’s starting with retirees. But I guarantee you this will be rolled out to all non-retirees to. Terrible ..Absolutely terrible….

Well that’s it…When my health fails, I don’t want to put up with this insurance shit and health circus…Looks like I’ll be retiring early..permanently.
Good news that my kid will end up being pretty wealthy at a pretty young age!

That or Canada…. Looks pretty interesting these days, ey![/quote]

flu, you, all of people stand to be on the “winning side” of this HCRA equation if you retire early. Had the HCRA never become law, you might have been required to pay $2000+ month just for yourself for coverage (for a crappy HMO) :=0

Go check out coveredca.com and quit complaining.

[UCGal]

[quote=bearishgurl]

flu, you, all of people stand to be on the “winning side” of this HCRA equation if you retire early. Had the HCRA never become law, you might have been required to pay $2000+ month just for yourself for coverage (for a crappy HMO) :=0

Go check out coveredca.com and quit complaining.[/quote]
Actually – FLU will likely not qualify for subsidies based on his income. Subsidies (tax credits) only apply to those with income < 4 times poverty level. And it's MAGI, not AGI income. (MAGI income = your AGI income PLUS your 401k/IRA contributions.) That said - I suspect FLU will benefit because of the ban on pre-existing conditions. He's relatively young - and premiums are based on age. His medical issues will not jack his rates up or allow insurers to not insure him. This will give FLU the opportunity to do consulting, entrepreneurial ventures, etc - and not be tied to an employer for healthcare. As far as retirees - Any non-government retiree that was firmly counting on retiree healthcare hasn't paid attention for the past decade. It's gone away along with pensions. And it was NEVER protected under PBGC, the way pensions were. I know a lot of folks on the early-retirement.org board who are waiting till October to verify the exchange rates - then turning in their notices at work... Access to insurance for the early retiree has been the big crap shoot preventing people who would otherwise retire from doing so. Lots of discussion over on that board about 4x poverty rate thing (and the cliff on the other side if you don't manage it right.) How that effects the roth conversion plans (don't convert to roth because it might kick you above that threshold.)

[Author]

Posts